Lakshmikantha Urs

cops

public

offences

High Court

Karnataka Police Act

Public Nuisance: The KP Act lists 25 offences for which the fine is Rs 100

Advocatemade it a matter of principle not to pay the measly Rs 100 fine and challenged thein court. It was found the law had expired in Dec 2004Almost all of theseare rampantly committed many a time in full view of the police who do not even penalise the violator. But now, a simple oversight on the part of the police threatens to lay waste the efforts of those few policemen who have indeed penalised such violators and collected fines. That oversight by the police department put them in an embarrassing situation before theUnder The, the police can impose fines of Rs 100 on each of the 25 civic offences (See A to Y of offences ,below) including spitting on city streets, talking indecently in public and letting loose an animal on the road. But the notification for this was in force only till December 2004, after which they forgot to re-issue the notification. So all the fine they have collected in the last 11 years under these offences is illegal.The high court on Thursday observed that the government will have to pay back all the people from whom they have collected the fine. The hearing in the case is complete and the court has said it will pass the final order on Monday, June 8.This case began way back in 2009. Lakshmikantha Raja Urs, an advocate practising in Bengaluru and a native of Chennapatna, had a case filed against him by the Chennapatna rural police under the KP Act – using indecent language and disorderly manner in public and being drunk and incapable of taking care of himself in a public place. ​ Each of these offences carry a fine of Rs 100. But Urs was in no mood to pay the fine as he felt that the case was filed against him out of vengeance.A week before that he had gone to the police station to file a complaint about the unnatural death of a relative. Urs ended up having a heated argument with the sub-inspector there.With the intervention of senior police officers the arguing parties shook hands and left. But a week later, a case was filed against Urs. As a matter of principle he decided to contest it rather than pay the measly fine of Rs 100.Urs’s petition reached the high court in 2011 seeking quashing of the case.Just before the summer vacation of the high court last month the case reached its final stage. Urs’ contention was that the notification of the Act was not applicable in Chennapatna.The court directed for presenting the notification issued under the Act. This Act specifies that the law will be in force during the time specified in the notifications issued from time to time. The government presented a notification issued in 1994.That is when things began to unravel. Though the notification said that the law applies to the whole of Karnataka it was clear that the December 15, 1994 notification was only valid for 10 years. After that the government was to re-issue the notification.The court asked the government to present the fresh notification.In its June 2, 2015 order, the high court directed the government advocate “to appraise the home secretary with regard to the seriousness of the matter. If the subsequent notification has not been issued, or the notification which was issued on 15.12.1994 has not been extended, after its currency, the prosecutions launched, in respect of the offences under Clauses (a) to (y) of sub-Section (1) of Section 92 of the KP Act, 1963, being illegal and also being abuse of process of the Court, will have to be quashed, irrespective of the fact that the accused have not approached for relief under S 482 CrPC.”The quashing of the act means that over 2,000 pending cases in Karnataka under this Section of KP Act would have to be dropped.On Thursday there was more in store. The government filed a statement before the HC that it would issue a new notification with retrospective effect to cover all cases filed after December 14, 2014. However the court noted that a retrospective notification in criminal cases is not possible.Justice A N Venugopala Gowda said the government will have to refund all fines collected under these cases since 2004. “If you cannot produce the notification, you have to enable them to take refund,” the court said.The government advocate said it would be impossible to find all those who have paid the fine. The court said that whoever wanted could come and take the refund. But the final order was not passed.The court said since the arguments were concluded, the case can be disposed with the order on Friday itself.The government advocate asked for the case to be posted on June 8 itself. But the court told him that a new notification in the meantime would not be accepted. The order is expected on June 8.a) Driving, standing in or dragging a vehicle without lights on a road at night;b) Not driving on the left side of the road or overtaking from left side or speeding;c) Leaving on road unsecured animal or vehicle;d) Causing obstruction on road with vehicle or animal;e) Repairing vehicles or train animals on road causing obstruction to othersf) Using any part of a street as a halting place for vehicles or cattle;g) Driving or leaving any animal or vehicle on foot-way;h) Advertisements causing obstruction to passengers;i) Use music, megaphone or loudspeaker between 10 pm and 6 am causing annoyance;j) Obeys a call of nature or permits a child to do so or bathes or washes his person in or near to and within sight of a street or public place;k) Letting loose, horse, dog or any animal in public;l) Bathes or washes in or by the side of a public well, tank, or reservoir;m) Defiles or causes to be defiled, the water in any public well, tank, reservoir, pond, pool, aqueduct or a part of a river, stream, nalla;n) Obstructs or incommodes a person bathing at a place set apart for that purpose;o) Wilfully and indecently exposes his person, uses indecent language or behaves indecently or riotously or in a disorderly manner in a street or place of public resort, or in any public office;p) Is drunk and incapable of taking care of himself in a street or place of public resort;q) Wilfully pushes, presses, hustles or obstructs any passenger in a street;r) Uses in any street any threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or posts up or affixes or exhibits any indecent, threatening, abusive or insulting paper or drawing;s) Begs importunately for alms, or exposes or exhibits, with the object of exacting charity, any deformity or disease or any offensive sore or wound in or near to and within sight of any street;t) Throws or lays down any dirt, filth, rubbish or stones or building material in any street;u) Neglects to fence in or duly protect any well, tank, or other dangerous place or structure;v) Affixes any bill, notice or other paper upon any building, wall or fence, or writes upon or defaces or marks any such buildingw) Affix any bill, notice or other paper upon any lamp-post, tree, letter-box, transformer, street or any other property belonging to the governmentx) Spits or throws any dust, ashes, refuse or rubbish in or near to any street or public placey) Spits in any court, police station, public office or building occupied by government or any public body