Revision as of 07:34, 19 September 2017

1

Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989

Red lights (beacons) on the cars of Honourable Judges

Allahabad High Court judgement

Katju’s 20-year-old judgment leaves SC red-faced

By Dhananjay Mahapatra, TNN , Apr 7, 2013

The Times of India

The HC judgment, which was co-authored by Justice Markandey Katju, had gone to great lengths in justifying how high court judges as constitutional post-holders were dignitaries, who could not be removed even by the appointing authority and that their official cars should not be stopped by traffic police.

NEW DELHI: A 20-year-old Allahabad high court judgment left the Supreme Court bench of Justices G S Singhvi and Kurian Joseph red- faced before it ordered the Centre and the states to take steps to limit list of dignitaries entitled to use red beacon with siren on official cars.

The HC Judgment, which was co-authored by Justice Markandey Katju, had gone to great lengths in justifying how high court Judges as constitutional post-holders were dignitaries, who could not be removed even by the appointing authority and that their official cars should not be stopped by traffic police.

The April 5, 1993 order of the HC, delivered by Justices D Chauhan and M Katju, had expressed horror at the temerity shown by two traffic constables in stopping the official cars of two other judges and contemptuously inquiring whether they were entitled to use red beacon at the top of their official vehicles.

The HC bench of Justices Chauhan and Katju graciously did not initiate contempt proceedings against the constables. But it issued a caution and an omnibus dictum to the UP government to inform all authorities not to impede or stop a Judge's car.

"It needs to be made clear that vehicles of any Honourable Judge cannot be detained or stopped except for a procession of a dead body passing through or electronic traffic signal otherwise on some other expediency of such nature the route may be diverted, if possible by advance intimation through the Registrar of the Court and in case of sudden emergent circumstance, by informing the driver of the Honourable Judge without exhibiting disrespectful conduct. While issuing notice of caution, we order accordingly," the HC had said.

It had said stopping of a Judge's car itself was an contemptuous act and even if some inquiry was to be made about the use of the car or about the driver, it must be "made through proper channel by approaching the Registrar of the High Court instead of having resort to detaining Honourable Judges, who were going to attend the court, whereby not only causing inconvenience, but lowering their dignity in public esteem".

While ruling in favour of the High Court Judges' entitlement of a red beacon despite nothing to that effect written in the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, Justices Chauhan and Katju had said, "The Honourable Judges of the High Court are entitled to the use of red light at the top of their vehicles (being constitutional appointees and functionaries enjoying the position of high dignitaries and distinction) even though there is no specification under the third clause to the proviso to Rule 108 of the 1989 Rules."

Asking government to fix signs on official car of a Judge prominently displaying "Judge Allahabad High Court" in both English and Hindi, the HC had issued a general mandamus to the state, its authorities and officers "not to create any impediment in the user of red light at the top of the vehicle by the Honourable Judges of the High Court and also for not causing any inconvenience an obstruction of any nature in any manner except as authorized under this order. All authorities and persons are mandated for complying with the order punctually."

The Supreme Court bench headed by Justice Singhi had one sarcastic line to add: "A judge becomes hourable by his judgments and not by using red beacon at the top of his official car." The bench also drew attention of senior advocate Harish Salve and Rakesh Dwivedi, who appeared for UP, to the title of the 20-year-old High Court case "Red Light on the cars of the Honourable Judges vs. State of UP."

Dwivedi had mentioned about this judgment saying unless it was stayed the state government would be in contempt. SC asked the states to ignore the order and proceed with possible amendments to the 1989 rules to limit red beacon use only to top constitutional authorities.

2

Motor Vehicles Act, compensation, unborn child

The Times of India, Aug 26, 2011

Dhananjay Mahapatra TNN

1.8L payout for death of fetus in road accident

The Supreme Court has awarded Rs 1.80 lakh as compensation under Motor Vehicles Act to Kusuma, who lost her unborn baby when her car collided with a bus. The task of a bench comprising Justice D K Jain and R M Lodha was made easier by the National Insurance Company, which didn’t challeng before the tribunal or high court Kusuma’s stand that an unborn child should be counted as a living being while claiming compensation.

Insurance co challenged only quantum of relief

The Supreme Court on rejected National Insurance Company’s appeal against the high court order that awarded compensation to a woman who lost her unborn child in an accident with a state transport bus.

The bench at the time of entertaining the appeal had found the question—can a fetus be considered a child for the purpose of compensation — important and appointed senior advocate U U Lalit as amicus curiae. It realized that the insurance company had not questioned the correctness of the award made by the tribunal, determining the amount of compensation “towards the loss of unborn child”. It had only challenged the quantum.

“The appellant company is now stopped from contending that an unborn child cannot be considered to be a child for the purpose of claiming compensation under Section 166 of the MV Act,” Justice Jain, writing the judgment said. “It is manifest from the judgment under challenge that the question for consideration before the HC in the claimant’s appeal was with regard to the quantum of compensation and not entitlement of claim for grievous injury to a 30-week-old child in uterus resulting in the birth of a stillborn child,” the SC said, upholding award of Rs 1.8 lakh to the woman.

Rules on beacons/ red, blue lights

2014: Tamil Nadu list of entitled persons

November 16, 2014: The Hindu

List of dignitaries who can use red, blue beacons

The State government has come up with a list of dignitaries who can use red and blue beacon lights on top front of the vehicles.

The Supreme Court on December 2013had directed the State governments and UTs to regulate the use of red beacon lights in vehicles carrying high dignitaries and use of lights of other colours on vehicles used by men in uniform, operational agencies and vehicles engaged in emergency duties.

In October 27 this year, the Transport Commissioner sent a proposal to the government which approved it and issued an order on Saturday.

Hereafter, only the vehicles carrying the Governor, Chief Minister, Chief Justice of the High Court, Assembly Speaker, Ministers and Judges of the High Court would be permitted to use red light with flasher as top light.

Vehicles carrying Chief Secretary, Deputy Speaker, Chairmen of advisory boards and commissions like Human Rights, Minorities, Public Service, Law; State Election Commissioner, Advocate General could use red light but without flasher as top light.

The vehicles carrying top police in the rank of DGP, ADGP, IG, DIG, SP, Commissioner, Additional Commissioner, DC and AC, ASP, DSP could use blue light with flasher as top light.

Vehicles carrying officials like government secretaries, department heads, district collectors, municipal chairmen and commissioners, district judges who require unhindered access to the roads for performing their duties can use blue light with flasher as top light, the order states.

2017: Government of India’s restrictions

Dipak Dash, Govt notifies beacon ban, May 2, 2017: The Times of India

 The government on Monday notified a ban on using all types of beacons by any vehicle except those used by police, fire department, ambulances, military and paramilitary forces when they are on active emergency duty .These vehicles covered under “active“ emergency and disaster management duties will have multi-coloured (red, blue and white) beacons like the ones used by PCR vans.

Each state will have to publish the list of exempted vehicles every year for public information. “The state transport departments will issue special stickers for such vehicles for identification,“ a government official said.

As per the notification, vehicles used in ports, mining areas and airports will be allowed to use “ambers“ (yellow beacons).Such vehicles will be allowed to ply only within the operation zones.

Sources said there were suggestions that officials such as collectors or deputy commissioners and sub-divisional magistrates be allowed to keep the beacons since in many cases they are early responders to any crisis, but the Centre did not accept this.

“Now it will be impossible for anyone to misuse the beacons, which had actually become a menace. People can single them out for violations.We are also increasing the penalties for any such violation,“ Union transport minister Nitin Gadkari had told TOI the day government had announced ban of all types of beacons by dignitaries.