AUGUSTINE.K.J v. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 22 May 2008
- Bench
- ANTONY DOMINIC
Outcome
Disposed of
With this clarification this writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- MotorVehicles Act, 1988 s. 185
Judgment
Operative part
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =W.P.(C) No. 12914 OF 2008 K = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =Dated this the 22nd May, 2008.J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext. P5 by which on the allegation that at the time when the vehicle was driven by the1st petitioner he was under the influence of alcohol, his driving licence was suspended for 3 months. On the materials now available before this Court, there is absolutely nothing to conclude that Ext.P5 is perverse warranting interference. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners points out that a crime has been charge sheeted in which offence under Section 185 of the MotorVehicles Act 1988 also has been charged against the petitioner. Therefore, all that is to be clarified is that in case the 1st petitioner is honourably acquitted in the criminal case, it will be open to the petitioner to seek review of Ext. P5. With this clarification this writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINICJUDGEjan/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With this clarification this writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
MotorVehicles Act, 1988 — s. 185.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 22 May 2008. The bench was ANTONY DOMINIC.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.