Summary
Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989 penalises anyone other than a railway servant or authorised agent who carries on the business of procuring and supplying railway tickets, whether physical tickets or e-tickets. The Court therefore restored the prosecution of an unauthorised person who allegedly used hundreds of fake IRCTC user IDs to sell tickets. It quashed the prosecution of an authorised agent, since Section 143 does not reach unauthorised acts of authorised agents, and creating multiple user IDs is not itself an offence under it.
Issues
- Whether creating fake or multiple IRCTC user IDs to procure and supply e-tickets is an offence under Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989, given that the Act predates e-ticketing.
- Whether Section 143 applies to an authorised railway ticketing agent who allegedly breaches the terms of his authorisation.
- Whether the criminal proceedings against the two accused were liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Provisions considered
- Section 143(1)(a), Railways Act, 1989Read literally, it bars any person other than a railway servant or authorised agent from carrying on the business of procuring and supplying railway tickets, without regard to how they are procured, so it covers online procurement of e-tickets. It does not apply at all to railway servants and authorised agents, and it says nothing about creating multiple user IDs. (¶¶ 16, 17, 19, 27, 28, 30, 34, 35, 36)
- Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Quashing is warranted where the FIR discloses no offence or continuing the case would be an abuse of process. Neither condition applied to the unauthorised accused, but no offence was disclosed against the authorised agent. (¶¶ 5, 6, 32, 33, 34, 36)
Held
- A provision does not stop operating merely because it predates a later development. If its words are broad enough to cover new facts and situations, it applies to them. The Kerala High Court erred in treating Section 143 as inapplicable to online ticket sales because e-ticketing was unknown when the Act was passed. (¶¶ 20, 21, 22, 28)
- Where statutory language is clear, courts may not add or delete words. Section 143 does not specify the mode of procurement and supply, so on its plain meaning it criminalises unauthorised procurement and supply of tickets, whether physical or online. (¶¶ 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29)
- Procuring tickets in the passengers' own names does not take the activity outside Section 143. Taking active steps to acquire and provide tickets to third parties, without being a railway servant or authorised agent, amounts to 'procure and supply'. The distinction the High Court drew between procuring and purchasing was unsustainable. (¶ 30)
- The allegation that the first accused, who was neither a railway servant nor an authorised agent, created hundreds of fake user IDs to sell tickets prima facie satisfied Section 143(1)(a), so the threshold for quashing was not met. (¶¶ 19, 33, 34)
- Section 143 governs only unauthorised persons and prescribes no procedure for authorised agents. Read strictly as a penal provision, it does not criminalise creating multiple user IDs or unauthorised acts by authorised agents. Even taken at face value, the allegations against the authorised agent disclosed no offence, and any breach of his contract with the railways must be remedied by civil action. (¶¶ 35, 36, 37)
Result
Both sets of appeals allowed: the Kerala High Court's order set aside and the proceedings against the unauthorised accused restored for trial, the Court's observations not being an opinion on the merits; the Madras High Court's order set aside and the proceedings against the authorised agent quashed.