The Supreme Court has referred to its E-Committee a petition seeking changes to the V-Courts portal so that citizens can compound traffic offences without having to enter a plea of guilt.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana passed the order after hearing Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, who appeared for petitioner Prabhjot Singh Dhillon. The court recorded that the issue raised in the petition was of paramount importance for the better functioning of the V-Courts portal, Live Law reports.
The Problem With The Portal
Dhillon, through Advocate-on-Record Prabhas Bajaj, sought a direction to the Supreme Court E-Committee to update the V-Courts portal by providing a clear and independent option for compounding offences without requiring users to plead guilty.
The petition alleged that the portal contained "dark patterns" and had a confusing interface that incorrectly equated payment of a fine with a plea of guilt, resulting in convictions for compoundable offences.
According to the petitioner, the way the portal currently operates defeats its objective of providing a speedy and citizen-friendly mechanism for disposing of traffic challans. He argued that citizens' fundamental rights were being violated because they could be compelled to enter a plea of "guilty" while compounding traffic offences without their knowledge, understanding or informed consent.
The concern raised by the petition goes beyond the convenience of paying traffic fines online. If a person seeking only to compound an offence can inadvertently enter a guilty plea, clarity in the digital process becomes crucial, particularly when the action may result in a conviction.
Delhi High Court Order Cited
The petitioner also referred to the Delhi High Court's decision in Benetton India Pvt Ltd v State of NCT of Delhi. In that case, the Supreme Court E-Committee was requested to make certain changes to the V-Courts portal.
These included enabling an option to compound offences by paying a fine, eliminating the need to wait for a Lok Adalat, and ensuring that such payments did not result in a record of conviction.
Citing the order, Dhillon sought a direction to the E-Committee to act on the High Court's recommendations in the Benetton case.
The petitioner's argument highlights the distinction between settling a compoundable traffic offence and admitting guilt. A digital platform intended to simplify the process should make that distinction clear to users, particularly when a choice on the portal can have legal consequences.
Also Watch:
Traffic Grievance System Also Under Focus
The petition did not restrict its prayers to changes in the V-Courts portal. It also sought a mandate requiring an Assistant Commissioner of Police or another authorised officer to remain physically present at police stations on specified days and times to address traffic-related grievances.
Another prayer sought a direction to the Delhi Traffic Police to establish a reliable and verifiable system to ensure that vehicle owners are notified about alleged offences within the legally prescribed 15-day period.
The E-Committee's consideration of the petition could therefore have significance not only for how motorists compound traffic offences online but also for the wider question of making digital traffic enforcement clearer and more accessible to citizens.
