Supreme Court Road Safety Directions in S. Rajaseekaran v Union of India (2017)
In S. Rajaseekaran v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2012, the Supreme Court issued a detailed order on 30 November 2017 addressing the implementation of road safety measures across Indian states and Union Territories. The order dealt with road safety policies, engineering, enforcement, driver training, emergency medical response and vehicle safety standards.

Background of the public interest litigation
Dr. S. Rajaseekaran, an orthopaedic surgeon and then President of the Indian Orthopaedic Association, approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking enforcement of road safety norms and improved treatment for accident victims. The petition highlighted deaths and serious injuries caused by road accidents and called for practical, time-bound implementation of existing legal requirements and expert recommendations.
A Bench comprising Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Deepak Gupta considered recommendations of the Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety, submissions of the amicus curiae and the response of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). The Court had constituted the Committee under former Supreme Court judge Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan by an order dated 22 April 2014. The Committee was notified by MoRTH on 30 May 2014 and subsequently submitted reports to the Court.
Relevant legal provisions explained
Article 32 of the Constitution: Enables a person to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights and empowers the Court to issue appropriate directions, orders or writs. The petition invoked this constitutional jurisdiction in the public interest.
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: The principal central legislation governing motor vehicles, licensing, registration, traffic regulation and road safety, as amended, including by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019. Section 215 provides for Road Safety Councils and Committees, including district-level committees under subsection (3). Section 215B, inserted by the 2019 amendment, provides for a National Road Safety Board. Section 134A concerns protection of Good Samaritans, while Section 162 addresses a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour, subject to the applicable scheme and rules.
Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989: Contain vehicle standards and compliance requirements. Rule 126 concerns testing of prototypes by prescribed testing agencies. The Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017 govern matters such as lane discipline and road conduct.
For authoritative and current materials, consult the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, India Code, and the Supreme Court of India.
25 road safety directions in the order of 30 November 2017
The following retains the substance and sequence of the directions recorded in the original article, including deadlines and notifications applicable at the time.
1. Road Safety Policy
2. State Road Safety Council
Most of the State Governments and Union Territories have already framed a Road Safety Policy. Those that have not framed such a policy namely Assam, Nagaland, Tripura, Delhi, Lakshadweep, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Andaman and Nicobar Islands, must now formulate the Road Safety Policy by 31st January, 2018. All States and Union Territories are expected to implement the Road Safety Policy with all due earnestness and seriousness.
3. Lead Agency
All States have already constituted a Road Safety Council in terms of Section 215 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Union Territories of Daman and Diu, Dadra andNagar Haveli and Andaman and Nicobar Islands have not constituted the Road Safety Council as yet. We direct these Union Territories to constitute the State Road Safety Council on or before 31st January, 2018. The responsibility and functions of the Council will be as recommended by the Committee on Road Safety. The State Road Safety Councils should periodically review the laws and take appropriate remedial steps wherever necessary.
4. Road Safety Fund
Only a few States have established the Lead Agency as recommended by the Committee on Road Safety in its communication of 23rd December, 2014. The States and Union Territories that have not done so should establish the Lead Agency on or before 31st January, 2018 in terms of the recommendations made by the committee on Road Safety. It may be mentioned that the Lead Agency will act as the Secretariat of the State Road Safety Council and coordinate all activities such as licensing issues including issues of driving licences, registration of vehicles, road safety and features of vehicles, along with other allied matters including emission norms and other activities as mentioned in the communication dated 23rd December, 2014.
5. Road Safety Action Plan
Some of the States have already established a Road Safety Fund. Those States and Union Territories that have not yet established the Road Safety Fund should do so not later than 31st March, 2018 and report back to the Committee on Road Safety. The corpus of the Road Safety Fund will be from the fines collected for traffic violations and the Fund will be utilized for meeting expenses relating to road safety.
6. District Road Safety Committee
The purpose of a Road Safety Action Plan is to reduce the number of road accidents, as well as the fatality rate. The MoRTH has already requested all the States and Union Territories to prepare a Road Safety Action Plan but it appears that the response to this has been somewhat lukewarm. The State Governments and Union Territories are therefore directed to urgently prepare a Road Safety Action Plan by 31st March, 2018 and put it into action after giving it due publicity.
7. Engineering Improvement
A District Road Safety Committee is required to be set up by the State Government for every district in terms of Section 215(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. As suggested by the learned Amicus and agreed to by the MoRTH, the District Road Safety Committee should be put in place by 31st January, 2018 and should be headed by the Collector of the District and should include amongst others the Superintendent of Police, Health Officers, Engineers of the Public Works Department, representatives of the National Highways Authority of India, the Road Transport Officer of the District and members of civil society from the District. The District Road Safety Committee must hold regular and periodic meetings to review road safety issues and take corrective measures.
8. Traffic Calming Measures
It appears that one of the main reasons for road accidents is the poor quality of roads, improper design, etc. The MoRTH is of the opinion that the protocol for road design and identification of black spots needs to be reviewed and enforced. Accordingly, it is directed that the MoRTH should publish a protocol for identification and rectification of black spots and take necessary steps for improving the design of roads to make them safe.
9. Road Safety Audits
It is suggested by the learned Amicus that traffic calming measures must be adopted at accident prone areas. This is agreed to by the MoRTH. However, such measures will need to be studied and then put in place. This is an on-going exercise which must be carried out by the Road Safety Committee with the assistance of the MoRTH and other stakeholders.
10. Engineering Design of New Roads
There is agreement, in principle, between the learned Amicus and the MoRTH to carry out Road Safety Audits. However, there appears to be a dearth of qualified auditors in Road Safety Engineering. The MoRTH supports the idea of capacity building. It is, therefore, directed that necessary steps be taken by the Committee on Road Safety as well as by the MoRTH to work in this direction since there can be little doubt that an audit of road safety is essential to reduce the possibility of road accidents through corrective measures.
11. Working Group on Engineering
The MoRTH is of the view, and the learned Amicus is also in agreement, that the Road Safety Audit as mentioned above should include the design stage audit of new road projects of 5 kms or more, rather than being based on the cost of the project. It is ordered accordingly.
12. Drivers' Training
The Working Group on Engineering (Roads) has already submitted a Report which is available with the Road Safety Committee as well as the MoRTH. This Working Group was constituted pursuant to the decision taken in the meeting of the 12th National Road Safety Council held on 25th March, 2011. The recommendations of the Working Group should be implemented in the terms prayed for by the learned Amicus as well as those accepted by the MoRTH. These will, of course, be in the nature of interim directions since the National Road Safety Board is likely to be created as proposed in the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill, 2017.
13. Lane Driving
This is the subject matter of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill, 2017 and no orders are required to be passed in this regard.
14. Road Safety Equipment
The MoRTH has already issued Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017 vide G.S.R. 634 (E) dated 23rd June, 2017. The Notification should be implemented by the State Governments and Union Territories strictly.
15. Alcohol and Road Safety
The Bureau of Police Research and Training has already prepared a Report on the subject and has submitted it to the Road Safety Committee in September, 2015. The recommendations in the Report should be implemented including acquisition of cameras and surveillance equipments in detecting traffic and identifying violators. It is also necessary to set up special patrol forces along the National Highways and State Highways for which necessary steps must be taken by the State Governments and Union Territories.
16. Road Safety Education
The MoRTH has already written to the States to comply with orders of this Court in this regard. The MoRTH may issue further advisories in this regard on a quarterly basis during the calendar year 2018 so as to serve as a reminder to the State Governments and Union Territories to implement the directions of this Court.
17. Speed Governors
The learned Amicus as well as MoRTH are in agreement that road safety education and counseling should be incorporated in the curriculum by the State Boards by 1st April, 2018. It is directed that the State Governments may seriously consider this recommendation and include Road Safety Education and Counseling as a part of the school curriculum at the earliest.
18. Emergency Medical Care
There is agreement that at least one Trauma Care Centre should be set up in every district with necessary facilities and an ambulance. The State Governments and Union Territories should take up this recommendation at the earliest since it is on record that treatment soon after a road accident is crucial for saving the life of the victim. In this context, it may also be mentioned that this Court has issued certain directions in Pt. Parmanand Katara v. Union of India , which should be followed.
19. Universal Accident Helpline Number
20. Permanent Road Safety Cell
The MoRTH has stated that there is already a call centre number, that is, 108 provided by the National Health Mission. Due publicity must be given to this so that an ambulance can be activated at the earliest whenever necessary.
21. Data Collection
The MoRTH has already taken steps for recording accident data and reports through computerised data entry. The State and Union Territories have been asked to take further action in this regard and make the data public for the information of all stakeholders. This needs to be followed up and no further orders are necessary in this regard.
22. GPS
23. Bus/Truck�Body Building Code
The MoRTH has already notified vide G.S.R. No. 1095 (E) dated 28th November, 2016 mandating the fitment of vehicle location tracking devices in all public service vehicles subject to some exceptions. Since this has cost implications, the MoRTH may assist the State Governments and Union Territories to ensure that to the maximum extent possible and within the shortest time frame, location tracking devices must be fitted in all public service vehicles as notified.
24. ABS, Air Bags and Headlights
This has already been notified by the MoRTH with regard to buses vide G.S.R. No. 287 (E) dated 27th April, 2014 and with regard to trucks vide G.S.R. No. 1034(E) dated 2nd November, 2016. No further orders are necessary in this regard.
25. Crash Test
This too has been notified by the MoRTH and the test for all light motor vehicles is required to be conducted by the testing agency notified under Rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. No further orders are required in this regard except the faithful implementation of the notifications and crash standards issued by the MoRTH.
What the order means under the present framework
The 2017 order helped frame a coordinated approach to road safety across governments and enforcement agencies. Since that order, the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 has changed several provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including road safety governance and traffic penalties. Current obligations should therefore be determined from the amended Act, applicable Central and State rules, and subsequent notifications rather than relying on the 2017 directions alone.
The Court's discussion of emergency medical care also remains important in light of the Good Samaritan framework and statutory provisions addressing treatment of road accident victims. Emergency assistance arrangements and eligibility under any cashless-treatment scheme should be checked against current government notifications.
The original report recorded that the case was listed for further hearing on 7 February 2018. This is a historical listing reference, not a statement about the case's present procedural status.
Read the Supreme Court order dated 30 November 2017
Open or download the original Supreme Court road safety order (PDF).
