IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 26TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 4519 of 2008(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ D.SURESH, M/S. P & P LOGISTICS, II/743, SANTHI COMPLEX, MUVATTUPUZHA ROAD, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS M.JACOB SRI.G.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, OFFICE OF JOINT RTO, THODUPUZHA. 3. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, IDUKKI, OFFICE OF RTO, IDUKKI. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============================= W.P.(C)NO. 4519 OF 2008 ============================== DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2008 JUDGMENT The prayer in this writ petition is to declare that payment of the compounding fee of disputed offences cannot be insisted as a pre condition for grant of fitness certificate of vehicles. The petitioner further prays for a direction to the respondents to grant fitness certificate of vehicles bearing No.KL.04-L-1018, KL- 06-C-8884, KL-06-C-8885, KL-06-C 8886, KL-06-C-8887, KL-06- C-8913, KL-06-C 8914 and KL-06-C-8915 of the petitioner, without insisting on payment of compounding fees of offences disputed by the petitioner. It is stated by the petitioner that some cases have been registered and since the petitioner has not agreed to compound the offences, fitness certificate was not issued. 2. Compounding of an offence is purely at the option of the offender and if the offender does not opt for compounding W.P.C. 4519/2008 -2- the offences as alleged, the department can only launch prosecution or such other proceedings as is permissible. However, the offender cannot be compelled to compound an offence and make it a pre condition for issuing fitness certificate. Therefore, if the vehicles of the petitioner are otherwise eligible to be issued fitness certificate and even if the petitioner has not opted for compounding the offences, he should get the certificate. In view of the above, I direct that the respondents shall consider the request of the petitioner for issuing the fitness certificate in respect of the lorries belonging to the petitioner, irrespective of whether the petitioner has compounded the offence or not. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ks. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE