Talking on mobile phone while driving is not illegal: Kerala High Court

Must Read

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

Follow us

Kerala High Court on Wednesday, May 16, 2018, ruled in favour of the petitioner stating that talking on mobile phone while driving is not illegal under Kerala Police Act, Section 118(e). If such a behaviour needs to be condemned then such statutory provisions should be enacted by the Kerala Legislative Assembly so that in future punitive measures could be implemented against such actions.

Facts of the case

On April 26, 2017, MJ Santhosh, a native of Kakkanad in Ernakulam, Kerala was arrested by the police for talking on mobile phone while driving in his car. The police booked him on dangerous driving charges and for endangering public safety. He was charged under Section 118(e) of Kerala Police Act (knowingly does any act which causes danger to public or failure in public safety) and Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act (driving a motor vehicle at a speed or in a manner which is dangerous to the public).

A single bench judge found MJ Santhosh to be a reckless driver and agreed with the prosecution that by displaying such reckless and dangerous driving the accused had attracted the provisions of Section 118(e) and is liable to be punished for such offences with imprisonment up to three years or with fine up to Rs. 10,000 or with both. But MJ Santhosh filed a petition with Kerala High Court through his advocate George Joseph Pulimoottil.

Court ruling

Advocate George Pulimoottil while presenting his case on behalf of the petitioner in front of two judges Division Bench comprising of Justices AM Shafique and P Somarajan of Kerala High Court pointed out the errors in the single judge’s verdict. He brought into Court’s notice a 2012 judgment by Justice SS Satheesachandran in a similar case (Abdul Latheef vs. State of Kerala) where it was held invoking Section 118(e) for unscrupulous and reckless drivers for using mobile phones while driving will not constitute an offence. Such drivers are liable to be punished under Section 184 Motor Vehicles Act for dangerous driving, the offence punishable with imprisonment up to six months or with fine up to Rs. 1,000.

The judges went over both the verdicts, the recent one, in this case, contradicting with the 2012 judgment to give their opinion in this case. The Court concurred with the 2012 verdict while ruling in favour of the petitioner stating that “the court can’t rule that the person who speaks on a mobile phone while driving causes danger to the public. There is no provision in the Police Act that bans people from talking over mobile phone while driving. Hence a person doing this can’t be assumed as one causes danger to the public. The assembly should pass an amendment to include these provisions in the Police Act to make it an offence.” The Kerala High Court further observed that anyone who has been charged under Section 118(e) has the right to seek remedy in such cases and “those concerned can approach the respective magistrate courts to quash their cases.”

Impact of the judgment

The judgment in this case could be considered a regressive one especially in the light of Rajasthan High Court’s April 24 verdict where the Court directed the state government to cancel licences of those caught talking on their mobile phones while driving. But Kerala High Court’s verdict has provided sufficient ammunition to dangerous drivers who would now be more inclined to break the law and pose more hazards on roads and a danger to public safety. A loophole in the legislation that usage of mobile phones while driving was not banned in either of the laws, the Acts being enacted prior to mobile usage becoming so popular cannot be construed as permission for reckless driving and utter disregard for public safety.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum of compensation have not yet...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated 28.10.2020 disqualified the petitioner and...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -