The Supreme Court of India has issued a stern directive to the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, mandating the immediate implementation of the long-awaited "golden hour" scheme as prescribed under Section 162(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. During proceedings held on April 28, 2025, the bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan ordered the government to operationalize the scheme within one week. This intervention follows years of administrative delays that have hindered the delivery of urgent medical assistance to road accident victims across the country.

The Secretary of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, V. Umashankar, appearing via video conference, confirmed the government’s commitment to the timeline. He acknowledged that the implementation had previously stalled due to systemic bottlenecks, specifically identifying the General Insurance Council as a source of obstruction. The court noted the GIC’s withdrawal of its pending application, IA No. 68786/2025, while recording a clear undertaking from the council that it would cooperate fully with the central government to ensure the scheme’s enforcement without further delay. The bench emphasized that the notified scheme must be officially filed on record by May 9, 2025, with a follow-up hearing scheduled for May 13 to verify compliance.

Strengthening Victim Compensation Mechanisms

Beyond the golden hour initiative, the Supreme Court expressed profound dissatisfaction with the government’s failure to implement Section 164A of the Motor Vehicles Act, a provision specifically designed to provide interim financial relief to claimants in road accident cases. Although this section was enacted into law on April 1, 2022, and intended to provide critical support during the pendency of compensation proceedings, the government has remained inactive for three years.

The court’s order described this lack of action as a failure that "has to be deprecated," given the vulnerability of accident victims who often face financial ruin while waiting for tribunal awards. Under the previous legal framework, Motor Accident Claims Tribunals possessed the authority to grant such interim relief; however, the enactment of Section 164A was intended to codify and streamline this process. The bench has now granted the central government a strict four-month deadline to frame and notify the necessary scheme. The court’s insistence on this timeline signals a shift toward holding administrative bodies accountable for the practical impact of legislative inaction on public welfare.

Accountability in Infrastructure and Reporting

The legal proceedings also touched upon broader concerns regarding the efficacy of safety infrastructure and data transparency. The court has been actively monitoring the state of pedestrian safety, particularly near high-traffic zones such as the Delhi High Court and the National Zoological Park on Mathura Road. Recent hearings have highlighted the danger posed by insufficient crossing infrastructure, with judges warning that concrete remedial measures—such as speed breakers, rumble strips, and proper pedestrian signals—must be finalized before November 25. The bench has suggested that administrative committees currently studying these issues should include legal experts and designated Amicus Curiae to ensure that solutions are pragmatic rather than purely bureaucratic.

Furthermore, the judiciary is addressing significant delays in the publication of official road accident data. The court had previously directed the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to publish an Annual Report on road accidents within six months of the conclusion of each calendar year. However, discrepancies have emerged, with reports for 2024 published well past expected dates and 2025 data still pending. These annual reports are essential for evidence-based policymaking, and the court has now issued notices to the ministry to explain these lapses. The court noted, "The fact that the GIC created road blocks is evident from the prayers made in IA No.68786/2025," highlighting the court's willingness to scrutinize the conduct of private and statutory bodies involved in the road safety ecosystem.

Coordination and Ongoing Supervision

The Supreme Court has taken a proactive stance by delegating oversight responsibilities to specialized bodies. For several outstanding applications related to road safety, the court has directed the Registry to forward all relevant documentation to the Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety, headed by former judge Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre. This committee is tasked with examining individual applications for directions and recommending actionable steps to ensure that the spirit of the Motor Vehicles Act is upheld.

In addition to these structural changes, the court is keeping a close watch on the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) being developed by the Committee on Road Safety. Amicus Curiae Gaurav Agrawal has been directed to share these protocols with state representatives to ensure that the implementation is uniform across the country. The court has made it clear that bureaucratic explanations, such as the formation of high-level committees, are no longer sufficient to justify the delay in executing court orders or legislative mandates.

As the May 13, 2025 hearing date approaches, the administration is under significant pressure to demonstrate tangible progress. The government has already offered an apology for failing to comply with directives issued in January 2025, and the court’s current insistence on strict deadlines reflects an effort to restore the enforceability of life-saving road safety provisions. Whether the government meets these stringent timelines will determine the next steps in what has become a protracted effort to institutionalize road safety and claimant protections. The court’s orders, from the implementation of the golden hour scheme to the timely release of accident statistics, serve as a reminder that the rights of citizens to safe road transit and swift compensation remain a priority for the judiciary.