SRINAGAR: A Special Mobile Magistrate Court in Srinagar has quashed five traffic e-challans issued against a city-based vehicle owner, observing that the challans were not issued in accordance with Rule 167A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR), 1989.
The order was passed by Shahbir Ahmad Malik in a case filed by Arsh Syed against the Traffic Police City Srinagar. The challans were disposed of on May 5 after the court examined the legality and procedure adopted in issuing them.
The petitioner had challenged five e-challans issued between January and March this year for alleged traffic violations, including disobedience of traffic signals and driving on footpaths or restricted tracks.
According to court records, the petitioner argued that the challans were arbitrary, vague, mechanically generated and unsupported by proper evidence. He also questioned the legality of issuing e-challans through photographs allegedly captured using mobile phones instead of officially authorised electronic enforcement devices.
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate Mudasir Shafi argued that the challans were issued in violation of Rule 167A of the CMVR and lacked proper evidentiary backing.
The court observed that the prosecution failed to produce witnesses or sufficient evidence to substantiate the alleged violations despite being granted opportunities to do so. It held that merely producing photographs of a vehicle without clearly establishing the offence did not meet the evidentiary threshold required under law.
In its detailed order, the court referred extensively to Rule 167A of the CMVR, which governs electronic monitoring and enforcement of traffic violations. The magistrate observed that e-challans can only be issued through officially authenticated electronic enforcement devices approved by the government and operated in accordance with prescribed legal standards.
The court further noted that every e-challan must contain mandatory details, including clear photographic evidence, nature of offence, date, time and place of occurrence, along with certification under the Indian Evidence Act regarding the electronic record.
Referring to the Supreme Court judgment in S. Rajaseekaran versus Union of India, the magistrate observed that electronic challans must be based on footage generated through authorised enforcement systems and not through personal mobile phones or unofficial methods.
The judgment also observed that allowing challans through personal mobile phones could lead to misuse, manipulation of evidence and procedural irregularities.
After examining the material on record, the court held that the prosecution had failed to establish that the challans were issued through officially authenticated electronic enforcement devices as required under Rule 167A and subsequently quashed all five challans issued against the petitioner.
The court also directed Traffic Police authorities to strictly comply with mandatory legal provisions while issuing future e-challans and ensure that such challans are generated only through officially authenticated electronic enforcement systems for offences covered under Rule 167A.
