Kerala High Court rules that a typewritten breathalyzer result cannot be used as evidence for drunk driving! Only the original printout from the machine is valid.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
KOCHI: The Kerala High Court ruled that a typewritten copy of a breathalyzer test result prepared by the police cannot be considered valid proof in cases of drunk driving under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Justice VG Arun stated that only the original printout from the breathalyzer machine, taken immediately after the test and properly certified, can be used as evidence in court.
“The print out of the test is not produced. Instead, a typewritten copy prepared by the police is submitted along with the final report. As contended, no evidentiary value can be attached to the type written report,”
-the Court observed.
The Court emphasized that, as per Section 203(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, breathalyzer test results are only valid if the test is conducted instantly and the original printout is submitted in court.
“The results of the breathalyzer test made admissible by Section 203(6) can only be for the original print taken from the equipment immediately after the test,”
-the Court stated.
This ruling was issued in response to a plea filed by a man seeking to cancel the case against him under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code (rash driving) and Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act (drunk driving).
The main evidence presented by the police was a typewritten copy of the breathalyzer result instead of the original printout from the machine.
The petitioner argued before the Kerala High Court that the police had not followed proper legal procedures by submitting a typewritten copy instead of the original document.
Additionally, he pointed out that, as per the Motor Vehicles Act, any person arrested for drunk driving must undergo a medical examination by a registered doctor within two hours of arrest. However, in his case, no such medical checkup was conducted.
The petitioner also stated that the police failed to follow Circular No. 44 of 2009, issued by the Director General of Police, which clearly states that the printed breathalyzer test result must be submitted along with the charge sheet.
The public prosecutor also confirmed that the police had not provided the original printout and instead only submitted a typewritten copy.
ALSO READ: Pune Porsche Accident: Court Sends Father and Four Accused to Police Custody Until May 24
After considering all the arguments, the Court ruled that the absence of the original breathalyzer printout made the typewritten copy legally invalid as evidence. As a result, the proceedings against the petitioner could not continue.
The Court allowed the petition and quashed the case against the petitioner.
The petitioner was represented by advocate TV Jayakumar Namboodiri, while Public Prosecutor MC Ashi appeared for the State.
CASE TITLE:
Dhanesh v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
