SHOAIB SHAIKH | NT
STAFF REPORTER
PANAJI
The punishments prescribed under the Motor Vehicles Act are not proving to be a deterrent to rash and negligent drivers with not a single licence being cancelled by the transport department during the last four years.
The number of licenses suspended between 2012 and 2016 is only 117 even as the state witnessed more than 17,000 road accidents and more than 1,200 fatal deaths during the same period.
Under the MV Act, any person driving dangerously causing the death of or grievous hurt to, one or more persons, the driving licence held by such person shall be suspended for a period of six months from the date on which the case is registered.
However, the transport department in-lieu of acting tuff against the offenders has been hearing the offender and offering an opportunity to the violator to prove innocence and subsequently decide on the suspension of the licence.
Speaking to this daily, a senior official of the transport department said that while the police after having registered a case of accident writes to the department proposing suspension of a licence, the offender is provided with a date to be heard by the officer before taking action.
“However, in most of the cases, the offenders neither turn up for the hearing nor submit in writing to decide the case ex-party, making the task difficult and incomplete as we cannot prove person guilty based on proposal of police only,” he added.
The officer further questioned, “When the police propose the suspension, the case is already sub judice and how can an officer decide who is guilty and the licence be suspended for the offence?”
Under Section 21 of the MV Act, the enforcement authority has been empowered to suspend the licence for a period of six months or if the person is discharged or acquitted before the expiry of the suspension period, then till such period. The officer who registers the offence shall bring such suspension to the notice of the court to take cognizance of offence and endorse the suspension thereon and intimate the fact to the licensing authority.
On repetition of the offence, the court can also cancel the licence of such a frequent offender.
While only one licence was suspended in 2014 for duration of 2 years, four licenses were suspended for a year and ten licenses were suspended for 6 months, while the rest of the suspensions were for periods less than six months.