The Court also held that if the police registers a First Information Report (FIR) against the offenders under the 1957 Act, as well as under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), they can compound the offences under the 1957 Act and proceed with prosecution for the IPC offences alone.
The Court has also opined that, “An officer empowered to seize a vehicle under Section 21(4) of the Act would also be the best person to file the private complaint too under Section 22.”
However, the Court noted that, presently, if the authority seizing the vehicle is not a person authorised to file a private complaint under Section 22 of the Act, the appropriate course of action would be for the seizing authority to file a report and then have a person authorised under Section 22 file a private complaint.
The Court proceeded to call for necessary government orders be issued so that officers authorised under Section 21 (4) of the Act also be authorised under Section 22 of the Act.
“In the interest of justice and also in the interest of speedy trial, this Court suggests that the persons, who have been authorised u/s 21 (4) also be authorised u/s 22 as well so that there is no delay in the initiation of prosecution and speedy trial. The Government Orders, to that extent, shall be issued with requisite modification,” the Court ordered.
Source: Barandbench
