Recently, the Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings against an accused under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, emphasising that a typewritten copy of a breathalyzer test result lacks evidentiary value. The Court underscored that, as per legal requirements, only a contemporaneous printout from the breathalyzer machine can be relied upon to sustain charges of drunken driving.
The case stemmed from an incident on January 21, 2019, when the petitioner was allegedly found riding a motorbike in a dangerous manner after consuming alcohol. The police registered an FIR at Payangadi Police Station, and the matter was pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur. The prosecution relied solely on a typewritten copy of the breathalyzer test result to substantiate the charge.
The petitioner contended that the Motor Vehicles Act mandates a proper breathalyzer test and that its result is admissible only if a printout from the device is produced in Court. It was argued that Circular No. 44 of 2009, issued by the Director General of Police, specifically requires that the breathalyzer test be properly conducted, and its printed result must accompany the charge sheet. Since only a typewritten copy was submitted, the petitioner claimed that the evidence was inadmissible and the proceedings were unsustainable. Whereas, the Public Prosecutor, upon inquiry, confirmed that no original test printout was available and that the typewritten copy was the only document placed on record.
The Kerala High Court observed that under Section 203(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, a breathalyzer test result is admissible only if the test is conducted immediately and the printout from the machine is submitted. The Court further noted that if the accused refuses the test, a medical examination must be conducted within two hours of arrest. Referring to Circular No. 44 of 2009, the Court reiterated that failure to produce the original test printout renders the evidence unreliable. It held that a typewritten report prepared by the police, in the absence of the mandatory printout, carries no evidentiary value and cannot be used to sustain a charge under Section 185 of the Act.
The High Court quashed all further proceedings pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur against the petitioner.
Picture Source :
