Buldhana bus fire: Maharashtra police conduct safety checks of vehicles on Samruddhi Expressway
Nagpur (PTI): The highway police have been conducting safety checks of vehicles, including condition of their tyres, air/nitrogen pressure and the condition of emergency windows, while plying on the Samruddhi Expressway here in Maharashtra, officials said.
The move comes after 25 people died when their private bus caught fire on the Nagpur-Mumbai 'Samruddhi Expressway' in Buldhana district on July 1.
As per an official release issued on Tuesday, the highway police, following directions from Additional Director General (Traffic) Ravindra Kumar Singal, checked every vehicle, including 98 buses, plying on the Samruddhi Expressway from Nagpur to Buldhana over the last two days.
They checked the tyre condition, nitrogen/air pressure in tyres, seating capacity, emergency windows, fire control equipment, whether bus had two drivers and conductors or not and possessed valid documents and other important factors, the release said.
The police also spoke to travellers and created awareness about road safety guidelines, it said.
Notably, the private bus which caught fire on the 'Samruddhi Expressway' leading to the death of 25 passengers on July 1 was issued a Pollution Under Control (PUC) certificate nine hours after the horrific incident, an RTO official said on Tuesday.
The authority has now sought a report from the local Regional Transport Office in this regard.
Transport commissioner Vivek Bhimanwar told PTI that an FIR would be registered against the centre which issued the PUC certificate if it was found to be at fault.
He has sought a report from the Yavatmal deputy Regional Transport Office, he said.
It is mandatory for every vehicle owner to have a valid PUC certificate showing that it complies with the emission norms. A vehicle without a PUC is liable to be prosecuted under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
