STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ISMAIL ALISAHEB AWATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS reference is made by the II Additional session of Judge, sholapur, recommending that the conviction of the accused under S. 123 of read with S. 42 (1) of the Motor vehicles Act and sentence of fine imposed upon him be set aside.

(2.) THE accused was in charge of the private of motor car bearing No. BYE 2717. On 30-8-1963 has was driving it from Sholapur to pandharpur with passengers on hire. There were eight passengers in the motor car at the time and the evidence shoed that they were charged Rs. 2. 20 per head per trip. He was therefore prosecuted under S. 123 of read with 42 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned trial additional session judge recommends that this conviction of the sentence of bet set aside.

(3.) TWO points were urged before the learned trial Magistrate, one was that is was only the owner of the vehicle who was liable only the and not the driver, and secondly in the any event of car, no motor car in the question was the a private of car on permits would be necessary was it was not transport of vehicle and therefore no offense of was committed under s. 42 and 123 of read together. Both these contentions were negative by he learned Magistrate. The accused went in the revision o the session of court which the heard by the II Additional Sessions judge. He accepted relying upon the decision of the Mysore High court upon Jayaram v. State of Mysore [1962] 2 Cri LJ 707 [ Mys]. Which case indeed is in favour of the accused. The learned additional of which sessions of judge did not accept the first contentions of which was urged in support of the revisional of application. I agree that there is no substances is the first contention.