Masking number plate of vehicle a violation under MV Act but not cheating under IPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently quashed a cheating case against a man who was booked for riding a scooter with its rear number plate covered by a black mask [Mohammed Abdul Ahad Shaker v. State of Telangana].

In an order passed on July 28, a Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih held that merely obstructing a vehicle's number plate would not constitute the offence of cheating under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unless the essential ingredients of the offence are established.

The Court clarified that covering the number plate of a vehicle could amount to a regulatory violation under the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) but such a violation could not be converted into a cheating offence.

“The regulatory breach of obstructing the number plate under the MV Act and rules thereunder cannot be dressed as an offence under Section 420 of the IPC without establishing the essential ingredients as required,” the Court said.

The Court was hearing an appeal filed by Mohammed Abdul Ahad Shaker against the Telangana High Court's refusal to quash the criminal proceedings against him.

The case arose in June 2020, when Shaker was stopped by a police officer while riding a black Honda Activa in Hyderabad with a black mask covering its rear number plate.

An FIR was subsequently registered against him under Section 420 IPC and Section 80(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The police alleged that he had covered the number plate to deceive them and avoid traffic challans.

A chargesheet was filed in August 2020, following which a magistrate took cognisance of the case.

In September 2025, Shaker approached the Telangana High Court seeking to quash the proceedings. The High Court rejected his plea, holding that a prima facie case was made out and observing that the number plate could not have been masked under any circumstances.

This led to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, Shaker's counsel argued that merely covering the rear number plate did not satisfy the ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC. It was also argued that if Shaker had actually intended to evade identification, he would have covered the front number plate as well.

The State opposed the appeal and maintained that a prima facie case had been made out.

The Supreme Court agreed with Shaker's contention. It noted that the essential ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC are dishonest intention, inducement and delivery of property or alteration or destruction of valuable property.

These ingredients were not made out from the allegations against Shaker, the Court found.

The Bench also rejected the police's apprehension that Shaker had covered the plate to avoid challans or that he would be difficult to trace if he committed a crime.

“The mere apprehension of the police that the rear number plate was covered in order to avoid challans, or that in case a crime was committed, it would be difficult to trace out the offender is at best, speculative,” the Court said.

The Court also noted that only the rear number plate had been covered, while the front plate remained visible and legible. This, it said, was inconsistent with any planned attempt to evade identification and went against the allegation of dishonest intention.

Therefore, the Court set aside the High Court's order and quashed the criminal proceedings against Shaker.

It clarified that the quashing would not affect Shaker's liability to pay the penalty under Section 177 of the MV Act.

The Court directed him to deposit the penalty with the concerned authority within one month.

[Read Judgment]