In the matter of: __________________________________
Charge : ___________________________ u/s ____ MV ACT, 1988
Date of next hearing: __________________
1) Immediate restoration of documents u/s 206(2) MV ACT 1988 if any,
alongwith furnishment of all documents u/s 207 CrPC 1973 as mandated.
2) free legal aid at State's expense u/a 39A of the Constitution.
3) Summary trial u/s 260 or 261 of the CrPC, 1973 as applicable
4) free copy of certified order / record in the event of sentence or
final order being passed against the accused u/s 363(2) CrPC.
5) Inclusion of this document as part and parcel of the judicial record
of this matter as the preliminary plea of the accused.
With additional prayers for
1) section 256 of the CrPC if applicable
2) article 21 of the Constitution if applicable.
3) and on merits
Preliminary objections to the summons / notice no. _________________
Most humbly sheweth,
1. The accused __________________
_________________ r/o ______________________________
_____________________________ wishes to briefly submit that he is unable to enter a plea or defence in the matter above till such time as his Constitutional safeguards assured under article 21 etc. of the Constitution are fulfilled. In this context it is submitted that the notice to appear / summons is not in accordance with section 208 of the MV Act,1988, and is also not in accordance with section 207 CrPC etc. resulting in the accused being unable to enter a plea till such time as he is fully aware of the prosecution's case with regard to the police report, list of prosecution witnesses etc. along with any evidence the prosecution intends to rely on, and that the Accused hereby makes application for free copy of the same to be provided to him u/s 207 CrPC without delay, as also a complete rendition of the particulars of the alleged offence against him in a language understandable to him, which has not been done thus far, and if the accused is in error on this point the prosecution may be put to strict proof thereof. It is relevant to submit here that in the humble opinion of the Accused:- the mandatory requirements u/s 207 CrPC are for all matters instituted on police report taken cognizance of by any Criminal Court or Magistrate and is not limited to warrant cases alone where of course there is a mandatory requirement u/s 238 CrPC for the learned Magistrate to satisfy himself that all requirements under the said section have been complied with before proceeding. In fact, it is submitted that on the basis of denial of documents to the Accused, he is constrained to presume that the current matter has been taken cognizance of u/s 190(b) CrPC on a basis of police report and is not a "complaint case" as defined u/s 210 CrPC, and that this is a blatant suppression of material fact by the prosecution.
2. It is humbly submitted that it being well established that the police report if any may not be relied upon as prime evidence, the accused in this context requires to question the Complainant or the Police Officer preferring the charge, or in the alternative suggest questions for the hon'ble court's intervention. In the event of Complainant or said Police Officer not being present in Court on the date fixed for hearing, the accused humbly prays to be discharged u/s 256 CrPC.
3. The accused prays for summary trial u/s 208 MV ACT, as also u/s 260 / 261 CrPC and speedy disposition of the case as he is being put to great economic hardship and privation by the unneccesary delay in bringing this matter to justice. It is submitted that this process of undue delay in hearing and deciding this trivial matter is a well conceived conspiracy by the State so as to force or terrorise the general lay public into paying illegal compounding fines / penalties, and profit thereby.
4. The accused prays for free legal aid of his choice at State's expense under article 39A of the Constitution read with section 303 CrPC and article 21 of the Constitution, and till such time prays that he not be disadvantaged by being opposed by any legally trained prosecution also by virtue of article 14 of the Constitution by matter of procedural discrimination. In this context it is relevant to submit that by reason of economic and other disabilities the accused is unable to afford competent counsel of his choice, and that he also requires sufficient time and facility for preparing the defence should it be required.
5. It is humbly submitted that as requisite procedure has not been followed by the State in the matter of summons / notice etc, that the accused is entitled to be discharged under Article 21 of the Constitution, and most humble prayer is made for the same.
6. Additional pleas if any.
7. The accused most humbly begs to be discharged without entering a plea as argued above, or in the alternative prays for all the reliefs as applied for as above which are not being repeated again here in the interests of brevity, or any other reliefs to his advantage at the hon'ble court's pleasure, such as payment of costs etc.
Most humbly submitted for the hon'ble Courts consideration, with reliefs as prayed for as above.
( Accused )
Place _______________________ Date _______________________
I, the accused, do solemnly state that the facts above are true to the best of my knowledge or belief or on the basis of information given to me.
( Accused )
____________ END OF
Copyright Notice under the Berne Convention.
This (c) document "how2mv88.htm" has been downloaded from
"www.oocities.org/bharat_x_law/" NationalHumanRightsServers in USA.
1. Under section 206(2) of the MV Act it is mandated that your driving licence seized by a police officer to ensure your appearance in court is returned against the temporary acknowledgement given to you, on your first appearance before the designated court. The court has no powers to retain this licence except as per the proviso to this section. You should also be aware that the police officer seizing your licence must have "reason to believe" that you will avoid service of summons before he can confiscate your licence, and it is well established that "reason to believe" is something much more than mere suspicion and must be backed up by evidence of your intentions, so you are perfectly within your rights to question the officer who impounded your licence as well as the officer in charge of a police station having jurisidiction who has submitted the police report / complaint on this point. Remember no traffic policeman likes being summoned to court, just think of the bribes he is losing out on and console yourself that he loses more than you.
2. The Magistrate will repeatedly ask you to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. Do not enter either plea till such time as your fundamental rights and safeguards are fulfilled, and remember no magistrate can force you to enter a plea till then. Remember you must be informed in writing about the exact nature of the offence you are accused of, ie, place, time, date, witnesses, evidence to be relied on by the prosecution etc., section numbers of the relevant act, penalties etc. mandated to be attached to the summons, before you are required by law to enter a plea. and you must also be given sufficient and effective notice of the same to enable you to enter a plea. Also remember that the burden of proof is on the police / state and so you must deny everything that you cannot disprove to your advantage.
3. Under section 313(1) CrPC any Magistrate may put any question at any time to any accused. However, under the same section's 313(3) the accused is not to be put on oath, and is not to be penalised by refusing to answer any question or giving false answer to the same. As a general principle however, it is better to "decline" to answer a question rather than give a false answer.
4. Remember that an honest citizen such as yourself has no fear of the Law or the Courts, and that you are always at the Court's disposal for disposition of the case however, protracted. Rarely will an honest magistrate, and most magistrates are essentially honest, decline to discharge you on the basis of the above petition. If you happen to run into one, please e-mail all your details to us, and we will send you the "taambad-tod" counter petition free of charge, as well as the automated complaint submission form to the National Human Rights Commission, and State Human Rights Commission.
5. To the best knowledge of the author, there is no need for any fees, judicial tickets etc, for petitions / applications under the CrPC at the present time.
6. Always be most respectful to the judge / magistrate. Ask the honourable court's permission before speaking. Repeatedly address him as "your honour" or "your Lordship" although technically only Justices of the High Court / Supreme Court are entitled to be called Lordships but it honours a magistrate to be called "your Lordship". In point of fact under the Constitution all foreign titles and honorific's are verboten..but who cares. Never argue with a judge, but you are instead allowed to "most respectfully submit..."
7. If you run into a particularly sticky magistrate, you should consider requesting transfer of the case to another magistrate in your home district where the vehicle is registered. The convoluted argument for this runs as follows... u/s 177 CrPC the ordinary place of inquiry / trial is by the Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. Since the fact of commission of the alleged offence is as yet unproven, and that the only local jurisdiction where the vehicle may have presumed to have ordinarily been on the date in question is the place of registration of the vehicle, you are entitled u/s 183 CrPC for "offences committed on a journey" to request transfer of the case to your local jurisdiction. Whether this tactic works or not is 50:50, but its good ground for appeal.
8. Remember that you are lucky to be live in India, where we have a thriving democracy and legal institutions that safeguard the public, unlike those bloody Pakistanis and Uncle Sams.