The Court mandated comprehensive measures to enhance pedestrian safety, recognizing it as a fundamental right and obligating governmental bodies to ensure compliance with safety and infrastructure guidelines.

ORDER

J.B. PARDIWALA & K.V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.

1. Dr. S. Rajaseekaran, a leading orthopaedic surgeon and a public- spirited citizen of this country has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India praying for the following reliefs in public interest:

“a) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent NO.5 to be directly responsible for this 'national emergency' and to form and head an apex body with all such powers so that all stake holders directly or indirectly responsible for the creation of safer roads, licensing of drivers and vehicles, enforcement of road safety, treatment of accident victims and provision of due compensation to the victim to be brought under one umbrella.

b) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent No. 5 to constitute a core road group for implementation of the following by allocating fixed time bound responsibilities on Respondent Nos 1 to 4 and 6 to 7:

- various recommendations as contained in the Reports of the 4 Working Groups of the Respondent No.1 pertaining to Engineering, Enforcement, Education and Emergency Care;

-the National Road Safety Policy;

-the measures suggested by the erstwhile Hon’ble Chairman of the Law Commission and

-the suggestions of the Petitioner as contained in paragraph 15 above.

c) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent No.5 to constitute a monitoring group to monitor the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and 6 to 7 in the implementation of each of the above contained in paragraph (b) above;

d) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent Nos 1 to 7 to file bi-annual reports with affidavits before this Hon'ble Court regarding the status of the implementation by them;

e) To issue appropriate directions to the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, the Respondent No. 7 to suitably modify the rules and regulations of compensation and disbursement of funds so that the accident victim is not left wanting of appropriate medical care on an emergency basis;

f) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or directions to the Respondent No. 5 so that the Government becomes liable in all accidents where a negligence of omission or commission by any of the Governmental organizations can be pointed as the cause of the accident;

g) To issue necessary orders to Respondent No.1 to urgently include biometrics in licensing and enforce stricter laws to prevent errant drivers;

h) To recommend modification of laws so that fatal accidents due to drunken driving or over-speeding will attract imprisonment and not merely a fine;

i) To direct the Respondent No.1 to seek amendment of the Motor Vehicle Act to include accidents where a single vehicle is involved due to defective road safety measures on the part of Government;

j) Such further reliefs that this Honorable Court may deem fit and proper to protect and save the plight of "not at fault road traffic accident victim”.

2. The case put up by the petitioner in public interest is that he is extremely anguished and distressed by the loss of life and limb caused by ever increasing number of road accidents in the country and utter callous and casual attitude of the States towards such accidents despite there being various statutory enactments and plethora of judgments/orders delivered by this Court and various High Courts across the country. According to the petitioner the quantum of loss of lives and limbs