Motor Insurance Policy Covers Cross-Border Travel If Specifically Authorized By Valid Permit Under MVA: Supreme Court Petrol Pumps Act As 'Commission Agents' For Mahanagar Gas, Liable To Pay Service Tax Under Business Auxiliary Service: Supreme Court Supreme Court Refuses To Dilute 'Bangalore Water Supply' Ratio, Affirms Worker Protection Remains The Core Of Industrial Disputes Act Order XXII Rule 9(3) CPC | Application Under Section 5 Limitation Act Must Be Filed Separately To Condonate Delay In Setting Aside Abatement: Supreme Court Principle Of Parity | Supreme Court Extends Benefit Of Fixed-Term Sentence To Co-Accused Based On Remission Period Right To Catch Fish Amounts To 'Profit à Prendre' And Is Compulsorily Registrable As A Lease Under Section 17(1)(d) Registration Act: Supreme Court Supreme Court Mandates Adoption Of Guidelines To Inculcate Sensitivity And Compassion In Judicial Processes For Sexual Offences 'Last Seen' Circumstance Is Weak Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused PSEB | Pre-Regularization Service Must Be Counted As Qualifying Service For Pensionary Benefits: Supreme Court Writ Of Quo Warranto Cannot Be Used For Redress Of Personal Grievances By Unsuccessful Candidates In Selection Process: Supreme Court 'Case Of No Investigation': Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused Citing 'Shoddy' Police Work And Lack Of Forensic Evidence 'Status Quo Cannot Be Vacated Without Appropriate Security': Supreme Court Directs Additional ₹200 Crores Deposit In RAKIA-Matrix Case SARFAESI Act | 'Bank' As Assignee Can Invoke Recovery Measures Even If Debt Was Originally Created By Non-Notified Financial Institution: Supreme Court 'CBI Failed Miserably': Supreme Court Tears Into 'Fabricated' Case, Acquits Bank Manager In 35-Year-Old Corruption Trial Mere Delay In Tax Deposit Cannot Be Equated With Non-Payment: Supreme Court Quashes Penalty On Saudi Arabian Airlines Revisional Power Under Section 56 Karnataka Land Revenue Act Cannot Be Invoked Beyond Three-Year Limitation Period: Supreme Court Prosecution Can’t Use Known Locations To Create 'Discovery' Fiction: Supreme Court Rejects Site Plan As Evidence Irretrievable Breakdown Of Marriage And Long-Term Separation Constitute Valid Grounds For Divorce Under Section 13(1)(ib) HMA: Supreme Court 'Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Is A Guideline And Not A Fetish': Supreme Court Acquits Man In 2007 Murder Case Over Fragile Circumstantial Evidence Plea Of Juvenility Is A Jurisdictional Fact; High Court Must Recall Final Judgments Under Section 482 CrPC To Remedy Miscarriage Of Justice: Supreme Court SEBI | Professional Clearing Members Have No Statutory Obligation To Verify Credit/Debit Positions Of Individual Clients Of Trading Members: Supreme Court

Kerala Conductors for Alleged Wrongful Restraint of Students: Emphasizes Equal Treatment for All Passengers

04 September 2024 10:57 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam has quashed the charges against three bus conductors who were accused of wrongfully restraining students from boarding their buses. The judgment, delivered by The Honorable Mr. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan on 4th August 2023, sheds light on the need for equal treatment of students and other passengers while boarding buses.

The accused conductors faced charges under Section 190(2) read with Section 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act), alleging violation of standards related to road safety, noise control, and air pollution. However, Justice Kunhikrishnan, while examining the provisions, stated, "Prima facie a conductor of a bus will not come within the purview of the above section." He further added, "Simply because students were not allowed to board a bus, it cannot be treated as a violation of the standards prescribed in relation to road safety, control of noise, and air-pollution."

The judgment also emphasized the need for bus owners to address their grievances regarding student concessions with the government rather than resorting to discriminatory practices. "Students and other passengers are on an equal footing. It is the duty of the police to see that there is no law and order problem in connection with the same," remarked Justice Kunhikrishnan.

Highlighting the concerns over the prevalent practice of not allowing students to board buses, the court directed the State police chief to take appropriate actions to avert any potential law and order issues arising from disputes between students and bus employees at bus stands and stops.

The ruling comes as a significant step towards promoting fairness and equality in public transportation and sends a strong message about the importance of providing equal access to transportation services for all passengers.

As a result of the judgment, all proceedings against the accused in the cases have been quashed, with the court urging the state authorities to look into student concessions' current realities and consider the demands raised by bus owners in this regard.

D.D-4Aug.2023

SIRAJ vs STATE OF KERALA

Latest Legal News