Supreme Court Judgment concerning the interpretation of Section 143 of the Railways Act, 1989, which penalizes the unauthorized business of procuring and supplying railway tickets. Case involves an individual, Mathew K. Cherian, accused of using fake user IDs to sell tickets without authorization, while the other concerns J. Ramesh, an authorized agent similarly accused of using multiple IDs. The Court examines whether Section 143 applies to online ticket sales and the actions of authorized agents exceeding their authority. The ruling reverses the Kerala High Court’s decision to quash the proceedings against Mathew, deeming online sales covered under the Act, but upholds the Madras High Court’s refusal to quash the case against Ramesh, stating that Section 143 only applies to unauthorized persons, not unauthorized actions by authorized agents, which should be addressed through civil action.
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 – Railways Act, 1989, Section 143 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Challenge as to – Whether the act of creating fake/multiple user IDs by an individual, who may or may not be an authorized railway agent, with the intention to procure and supply online tickets through IRCTC portal would constitute an offence under Section 143 of the Act? – Section 143, on its plain language, prohibits any person, other than a railway servant or an authorised agent, to conduct the business of procurement and supply of railway tickets – The provision does not specify the modalities of the procurement and supply – Hence, reading the section and give its contents the natural and ordinary meaning, keeping in mind the objective and purpose of the legislation, it admits of no doubt that this provision criminalises unauthorised procurement and supply, irrespective of the mode of procurement and supply – Mere fact of the system of e-reservation and e-tickets being introduced after the enactment of the Act does not render the provision in Section 143 toothless to combat the illegal sale of e-tickets – Section 143, importantly, makes no distinction between physical and online sale of tickets – The mischief that the provision seeks to remedy is that there should not be illegal and unauthorised procurement and sale of tickets, whatever be the mode – physical or online – The facts of the case prima facie reveal the commission of an offence under Section 143 of the Act – ‘M’, without the authorisation of the railways, was carrying on a business of procurement and supply of railway tickets – The allegations against ‘M’ taken at face value fulfill the elements required under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act; hence, the threshold for quashing has not been met in this case – Appeal deserves to be allowed and consequently, the criminal proceedings against ‘M’ need to be restored.
(Para 27,28, 37 and 38)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 – Railways Act, 1989, Section 143 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Challenge as to – Expression ‘procure’ and ‘purchase’ – High Court made the distinction between “procure” and “purchase” – It held that the tickets were “purchased” by genuine passengers – The tickets were not sold by ‘M’, rather, the tickets were sold by IRCTC in the names of the passengers – Hence, it cannot be said that ‘M’ was procuring the tickets – Held that this reasoning is flawed and unsustainable – Travel agents, by and large, do not purchase tickets in their own name and then sell it to the passengers – Tickets are procured in the name of the passengers by these agents in lieu of a commission on the price thereof – Taking active steps, however faithfully, in order to acquire and provide tickets to third parties but without being a railway servant or an authorised agent would attract the expression ‘procure and supply’ as in Section 143 – ‘M’ not being an authorised agent has to face the proceedings against him.
(Para 30 and 37)
(C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 – Railways Act, 1989, Section 143 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Challenge as to – Whether the act of creating fake/multiple user IDs by an individual, who may or may not be an authorized railway agent, with the intention to procure and supply online tickets through IRCTC portal would constitute an offence under Section 143 of the Act? –‘R’ was an authorised agent of the railways carrying on the business of procurement and supply of railway tickets – Section 143 only deals with the actions of unauthorised persons and does not mandate a procedure to be followed by the authorised agents for procuring or supplying tickets to its customers – The nature of allegations against ‘R’ in the connected appeal, though serious, Section 143 would not be attracted insofar as he is concerned – That apart, Section 143 does not criminalise creating multiple user IDs – Penal provisions have to be read strictly and narrowly as a general rule – Section 143, by being completely silent on creation of multiple user IDs, penalises the actions of only the unauthorised agents and not unauthorised actions of the authorised agents – Thus, even if the facts disclosed in the first information report are taken at face value, commission of an offence cannot be attributed to ‘R’ – Any breach has to be remedied by civil action and not criminal action – ‘R’ being an authorised agent, cannot be proceeded against under Section 143 of the Act for alleged breach of any of the terms and conditions of the contract – If, at all, he would be liable to face civil action – Criminal proceedings against ‘R’ are liable to be quashed.
(Para 35 to 37 and 40)
Inspector, Railway Protection Force, V. Mathew K Cherian
Supreme Court: 2025 INSC 51: (DoJ 09-01-2025)
