K MUKUNDA BHAT Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these criminal petitions arising out of distinct liability in respect of the payment of motor vehicle taxes towards the omnibus bearing registration No. 8686. The petitioner is the owner of the bus. For the periods 1-5-1989 to 1-5-1993, 17 quarterly taxes were not paid. The regional Transport Officer launched prosecution against the petitioner herein in C. C. Nos. 2699 and 2753 of 1993 for committing the offence punishable under Section 12 (l) (a) read with Section 3 (1) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957. The total tax liability due was in a sum of Rs. 48,931/ -. The petitioner before the Trial Court contended that in respect of C. C. Nos. 2699 to 2705 of 1993 quarterly taxes have been paid at the rate of Rs. 640/- for the period 1-5-1989 to 1-11-1990 for the balance of period admittedly no taxes are paid. However, on 3-1-1991 petitioner had submitted an application to the R. T. O. , udupi for the cancellation of the Registration Certificate of the bus in question stating that the bus was involved in an accident and it has become irreparable and that the original documents like registration certificate, fitness certificate etc. , have been seized by the R. T. O. , Nagarkoil. To substantiate the seizure of the document the photocopy of the check report evidencing the seizure of the document by the R. T. O. , nagarkoil is marked at Ex. P. 6 (a ). In the light of the material it was strenuously contended by the petitioner before the Trial Court that he is not obliged to pay the taxes under law since the bus was not put into use. The Trial Court rejected the defence version, convicted the accused and levied fine equivalent to quarterly taxes for each of the offence.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, an appeal was filed before the Principal Sessions Judge, Mangalore in Cri. A. Nos. 174 and 176 of 1994. The learned Sessions Judge remanded the case to the trial Court holding that the R. T. O. , Udupi should have interacted with the R. T. O. , Nagarkoil to ascertain the correctness of the version of the petitioner. Cri. A. Nos. 174 and 176 of 1994 were dismissed holding that the arrears of tax is for the period earlier to the application made before r. T. O. , Udupi for cancellation of the Registration Certificate. Being aggrieved by the order of remand, the present revision petitions are filed.

(3.) AFTER hearing the Counsel for the petitioner at length and the state Public Prosecutor the fact that the bus in question was involved in an accident and was irreparably damaged is fairly established. The petitioner made an application to the R. T. O. , Udupi on 3-1-1991 for cancellation of the Registration Certificate to avoid the payment of further tax. Ex. P. 6 (a), the photostat copy of the check report issued by the R. T. O. , nagarkoil indicating the seizure of the original Registration Certificate and other documents relating to the vehicle was also produced. Ex. P. 6 (a) although a photostat copy would serve as secondary evidence. In view of such document, R. T. O. , Udupi could have contacted with the r. T. O. , Nagarlkoil to find out the veracity of the version made out by the petitioner. To overlook the defence the version of the petitioner by insisting that only original of the check report should have been produced be fore the R. T. O. , Udupi, is to technical argument. As aforesaid, nothing prevented the R. T. O. , Udupi too have verified the correctness of documents by interacting with the R. T. O. , Nagarkoil. The ruling of the Su-preme Court in State of Karnatdka v K. Gopalakrishna Shenoy and others1, wherein it is held thus: