38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, May 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Crime, Police And Law

Odisha Truck Driver Fined Rs 86,500, The Highest Ever Under Motor Vehicles Act

By LawStreet News Network      10 September, 2019 04:09 PM      0 Comments
Odisha Truck Driver Fined Rs 86,500, The Highest Ever Under Motor Vehicles Act

In what could be the heftiest fine on a traffic violator under the amended Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in the country, Sambalpur Regional Transport Office (RTO) has issued a challan of Rs 86,500 to a truck driver in Odisha.

Truck driver Ashok Jadav was fined on September 3, 2019. Though the total fine amount was Rs 86,500, Jadav paid Rs 70,000 after negotiating with authorities for more than five hours.

According to reports, Jadav was fined for allowing an unauthorised person to drive (Rs 5,000), driving without a licence (Rs 5,000), overloading with an excess of 18 tonnes (Rs 56,000), carrying over dimension projections (Rs 20,000) and a general offence (Rs 500).

The truck, bearing Nagaland registration number NL01 G1470 belongs to a Nagaland-based company BLA Infrastructure Private Limited. The truck was loaded with a JCB machine. It was on its way to Chhattisgarh from Talcher town of Angul district when it was intercepted by officials in Sambalpur.

Odisha is among the few states which started implementing the amended Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, from September 1, 2019, when it came into force. It has grossed the highest penalty in the country in the first four days of its implementation by collecting over Rs 88 lakh.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

no-offence-under-sc-st-act-if-alleged-casteist-abuse-occurred-inside-private-house-sc
Trending Judiciary
No Offence Under SC/ST Act If Alleged Casteist Abuse Occurred Inside Private House: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules SC/ST Act offence is not made out if alleged casteist abuse occurred inside a private house without public view.

14 May, 2026 03:16 PM
madras-hc-bars-tiruppattur-mla-from-floor-test-over-disputed-one-vote-victory
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Bars Tiruppattur MLA From Floor Test Over Disputed One-Vote Victory [Read Order]

Madras High Court restrains Tiruppattur MLA from floor test participation over disputed one-vote victory and alleged electoral irregularities.

14 May, 2026 03:24 PM

TOP STORIES

delhi-hc-refers-to-larger-bench-issue-on-stage-of-hearing-accused-under-section-223-bnss-before-cognizance
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Refers to Larger Bench Issue on Stage of Hearing Accused Under Section 223 BNSS Before Cognizance [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court refers to Larger Bench issue on when accused must be heard under Section 223 BNSS before taking cognizance.

09 May, 2026 10:25 AM
hymen-intact-does-not-mean-no-penetration-delhi-high-court-upholds-pocso-conviction-of-tenant-who-raped-six-year-old-girl
Trending Judiciary
‘Hymen Intact Does Not Mean No Penetration’: Delhi High Court Upholds POCSO Conviction of Tenant Who Raped Six-Year-Old Girl [Read Order]

Delhi High Court upheld a tenant’s POCSO conviction for raping a six-year-old girl, holding that an intact hymen does not negate penetration.

09 May, 2026 12:42 PM
consumer-commission-directs-bus-operator-to-pay-50000-compensation-after-barat-reaches-wedding-destination-at-3-am-due-to-breakdown
Trending Judiciary
Consumer Commission Directs Bus Operator to Pay ₹50,000 Compensation After Barat Reaches Wedding Destination at 3 AM Due to Breakdown [Read Order]

Delhi Consumer Commission ordered a bus operator to pay ₹50,000 compensation after a Barat reached the wedding venue at 3 AM due to breakdown.

09 May, 2026 01:56 PM
sabarimala-reference-day-13-can-faith-justify-civil-death-and-genital-cutting-of-children-sc-bench-examines-religions-reach-over-the-body
Trending Judiciary
Sabarimala Reference Day 13: “Can Faith Justify Civil Death and Genital Cutting of Children?”: SC Bench Examines Religion’s Reach Over the Body

SC’s nine-judge bench examined whether religious practices violating dignity, bodily autonomy and conscience can claim protection under Article 26.

09 May, 2026 02:25 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email