Can't Suspend Registration Of Vehicle For "Bullet-Proofing" Sans Specific Finding Of Danger To Public Or Other Conditions U/S 53 MV Act: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court has held that though Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act (which talks about alteration in motor vehicle) does not explicitly permit bullet-proofing of vehicles, nonetheless the registration of a vehicle cannot be suspended for bullet proofing in absence of a specific finding that such modification causes danger to the public as stipulated under Section 53 of the Act.

Section 53 stipulates situations that may lead to suspension of registration of vehicle. It includes such vehicle whose use in public place would constitute a danger to the public, or which fails to comply with the requirements of MV Act or rules, or vehicle used for hire or reward without valid permit.

Justice Sachin Datta observed,

“The fact that the Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 does not incorporate any provision allowing alteration/modification regarding bullet proofing of any vehicle does not imply that bullet proofing of a vehicle results in a situation whereby use of a vehicle in public place would constitute a danger to the public. Moreover, the absence of any stipulation/provision regarding bullet proofing cannot by itself be a ground for suspension of registration of the vehicle, unless a finding is rendered as regards the statutorily prescribed parameters for suspension of registration, as set out in Section 53 (1) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.”

The remarks were made while dealing with an appeal against suspension of registration of petitioner's car for partial bullet proofing. The Transport Department had cancelled the car's registration, saying there are no rules for bulletproofing cars.

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was in bereft of any reason whatsoever insofar as the various submissions made by the petitioner giving justification for bullet proofing of the vehicle have not been considered.

The Court said a perusal of the suspension order does not disclose as to how the conditions enumerated in Section 53 (1) (for suspension of registration) are satisfied in the present case. "The impugned order does not say that the bullet proofing of any vehicle is impermissible within the framework of the Motor Vehicles."

Thus it quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the statutory authority, asking it to pass a reasoned order.

Case Title: Rumit Kumar Vs Transport Department GNCTD And Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 518

Click Here To Read The Judgement