S. RAJASEEKARAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-52
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on April 22,2014

S. Rajaseekaran Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PARMANAND KATARA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

BIPIN BIHARI SAHU VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2015-9-49] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA K. GUPTA VS. SHRI SHIVRAJSINGH COUHAN [LAWS(MPH)-2016-3-96] [REFERRED TO]
NARSIMHA VADLAKONDA VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(APH)-2016-7-27] [REFERRED TO]
SAURABH MISHRA VS. STATE OF M P & ANOTHER [LAWS(MPH)-2016-1-91] [REFERRED]
DR. S. RAJASEEKARAN (II) VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2017-11-58] [REFERRED TO]
B P MAHESH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS [LAWS(KAR)-2018-1-101] [REFERRED TO]
TANVEER SINGH VS. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TRANSPORT [LAWS(CAL)-2020-7-15] [REFERRED TO]
RAJU KATRAVATH VS. STATE OF TELANGANA AND ORS. [LAWS(TLNG)-2019-8-98] [REFERRED TO]
ANOOP K.A. VS. K.R. JYOTHYLAL [LAWS(KER)-2022-2-76] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

RANJAN GOGOI, J. - (1.)THE petitioner is a leading orthopaedic surgeon of the country and the Chairman and Head of the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in the Ganga Hospital at Coimbatore. He was/is also the President of the Indian Orthopaedic Association, the largest professional body of orthopaedic surgeons in the country. In the course of his professional duties spanning over several decades the petitioner, while rendering professional service to victims of road accidents, has come to realise that the large number of accidents that occur every day on the Indian roads, causing loss of human lives besides loss of limbs and other injuries resulting in human tragedies, are wholly avoidable. In the light of the experience gained and propelled by a desire to render service beyond the call of duty, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking the Court 's intervention, primarily, in the matter of enforcement of the prevailing laws and also seeking directions for enactment of what the petitioner considers to be more appropriate legislative measures and for more affirmative administrative action. The petitioner also seeks directions from the Court for upliftment of the existing infrastructure and facilities with regard to post -accident care and management to minimize loss of life and physical injuries to victims of road accidents.
(2.)IN the context of the aforesaid effort, the petitioner has set out detailed statistics published by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) in the volume ''Road Accidents in India 2010 '' highlighting the extent of increase of road accidents and fatal cases between 1970 -2010. In the aforesaid publication in which the relevant figures are pegged to the year 2010 it is reported that road traffic accidents in the said year i.e. 2010 numbered nearly 5,00,000 resulting in approximately 1,30,000 deaths and serious injuries including amputation of limbs to over 5,00,000 persons. One serious road accident in the country occurs every minute; and one person dies in a road traffic accident every 4 minutes. Road traffic accidents, therefore, have the potential of being one of the largest challenges to orderly human existence necessitating immediate and urgent intervention. Not only the existing laws, which by themselves are inadequate, are not being implemented in the right earnest; the need for changes in such laws and upgradation thereof, though admitted, are yet to see the light of the day. Besides, victims of road traffic accidents die in large numbers due to lack of timely and proper medical attention which, inter alia, is caused by avoidable disputes with regard to jurisdiction of the administrative authorities including the police who are to deal with the matter instead of rendering immediate medical aid to the victim. Failure to provide immediate medical attention resulting in death and irreversible injuries is also due to inadequate facilities for early removal of the victims of road accident to the nearest hospitals/medical centres. Inadequate number of ambulances and other suitable modes of transport to transport the victims of road accidents; the absence of trauma centres in different hospitals, and lack of even basic health care facilities are additional features that contribute to the unimpeded growth of the imminent menace to human life. Such unabated growth, it may be mentioned, is reflected in the figures beyond 2010 also. In fact, the corresponding figures of the year 2012 available in ''Accidental Deaths and Suicides in 2012 '' a publication of the National Crime Records Bureau show a uniform graph for all the relevant figures i.e. number of road accidents; fatal cases as well as serious injury cases.
The petitioner has not visualized the magnitude of the problem that he seeks to highlight on the basis of his individual perceptions. He seeks to base his contentions on reports submitted by the Working Groups constituted by the MoRTH to survey the different facets of the problem as well as research and authoritative articles published on the subject by persons of eminence. It will, therefore, be necessary to briefly outline what has been dealt with and indicated in the said reports and publications.

(3.)AT the outset, there are the reports of four Working Groups set up by the first respondent to submit recommendations and suggestions on short term and long term measures to curb road accidents in the country. The said four Working Groups were required to go into four 'Es ' of road safety, namely, Engineering, Enforcement, Education and Emergency Care.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.