Few thoughts - SC Judgment on the Road Accidents

Few thoughts - SC Judgment on the Road Accidents


Someone lodged a PIL in the Supreme Court as regards the number of deaths arising out of road accidents around the country on an annualised basis.

Such cumulative casualty figure is pegged at around one lakh ( = 100,000 ) numbers per annum.

Quite a casualty number, this !!

The litigant tied this numbers/ figures to the consumption of alcohol and driving under the influence of alcohol as the causative of majority of these fatal accidents.

This might be true, to a ceratin extent.


{{

Btw - what about the annual casualty numbers at the unmanned railway crossings around the country ? Those numbers itself might be around another - 50,000 to 60,000 per annum throughout the country ?

Do these victims at the unmanned railways crossings... are... mere walkers, jay-walkers, blind, deaf, dumb people ?

or, some set of similarly... drunken fellows ?

This is obviously a logical question... an aptly pragmatic question that naturally arises.

}}

Merely on this PIL alone...

Couple of months back, the Supreme Court passed an order that prohibits selling of intoxicants ( say - liquor ) near a vicinity of 50 metres from the state and national highways.


{{

Does this seem like that the Central Govt. ( = NDA-2 ) actually tacitly allowed the SC to rule or pass judgment  on its's behalf ?

On matters... on which the union and the respective state Govts. should have individually or cumulatively decided ?

... are the questions that confronts one.

And... undoubtedly... it cannot escape anyone that... perhaps the Union Govt. indirectly allowed these following set of judgments to be passed ?

Does this seem like apparently true ?

For the individual states' and therefore the nations' overall taxation projections for a fiscal year ( this is tantamount to - national finances ) are affected here-withal, with this judgment. Although, this is in the short term.

Yet, in the long term - what might be the chances that this SC judgment has some effect on the drunk driving or road accident fatalities... remains to be seen, down the road.

}}

In a subsequent stricture order the SC increased this distance restriction to 500 meters.

...

Now...
There is every chance that quite a few of the road accidents do take place when someone is under the influence of alcohol. Yet- tying this figure to roadside liquor outlets and shifting these outlets away from sight... as a credible/ tangible/ sound/ fool-proof solution... is hardly going to have the desired overall effect and end result.

Though some short term gains might be palpable, here.

Only thing this SC imposed restrictive directive might achieve is... a lots of such outlet owners will be definitely forced to move shop to another location. This might take some while for them.

Say - couple of weeks to couple of months, at least. That might require that a vast numbers of the state Govt. sponsored liquor outlets might be required to stay shut for weeks and months. Thereby somehow affecting the Govt. revenue stream owing to the direct/ indirect taxations imposed on the excise trade.

Frankly -
the excise department is either the first or the second top most Govt. revenue grosser in a vast majority of the Indian states. Not sure how the respective state Govt.'s are going to recoup the losses owing to the dwindling down of their revenue stream, meanwhile.

Btw -
The efficiency of the governance and the execution of the Govt. plans/ schemes depends very much on the Govt. revenue.

So... going forwards... might there be quite some hiccups in the respective state Govt.'s revenue generation targets for FY 2017-18 as also the individual state Govts.' and UTs'... stipulated plan actualizations and growth projections ?

Most probably - yes.

...
...
...

Leaving those Govt. revenue concerns aside... would it NOT be a much better idea for the honorable Supreme Court to direct the Union/ State Govts. to come up with very strict and harsh road safety/ driving - norms, rules, laws and regulations ?

And... direct the central Govt. to enact some countrywide legislation ?


Something of the kind -

a) Heavy fine and penalty on drunk driving. In case the alcohol content in the blood is above a certain level then - this be made ( perhaps ) -

1) a bailable or non-bailable offense,
2) inviting heavy penalty on the vehicle owner.

b) the seizure of that vehicle which is driven by a person under the influence of alcohol - 1) above a certain permissible level, or 2) that gets into a (non)fatal road accident - for a period of time spanning 10-20-30-45 days or even 1- 3- 6 months.

This might severely reformat the thinking of the vehicle owners and their style of driving.

NOTE -
A strict censure acts as a potent deterrent. Especially when it comes to heavy fines and confiscation of the vehicle for sure... for some certain term.


c) For a repeat offender - the same offender ought to be necessarily put on a watch list.

And... a desirable punitive action - cancellation of the driving license for ( say ) - 1 to 3 to 5 to 7 to 10 or more months/ years.

This is vitally important.


d) Lifetime annulment of the 'right to drive' in case the drunken person is involved in an accident that directly or indirectly causes death of any person.

This might mean that this person is never ever issued any driving license by any RTO, around the country. And, around the world.

e) Confiscate and auction those vehicles that are involved in serious road accidents... for those whose driver is found and proven to be drunk ?

f) The GoI must strictly enforce the speeding limit on all the highways. This might act as a deterrent.

...
...
...

I believe that there are very smart and efficient people in the Transportation department of the union and state Govt. Altogether they can come up with sound strategy to cap this menace of the roadside fatalities arising out of drunken driving.

Repeating once again - drunk driving ( under the influence of intoxicants ) is the root problem that needs to be addressed.

There has to be a fear and apprehension in people - that they MUST NOT drive under the influence of any intoxicants. For... there might be heavy court imposed penalty... if they are ever caught.

This fear factor might work the tricks.

Decisions impacting and restricting the Govt. revenue stream in the short/ long term might NOT have far reaching use and effectiveness. Though... it might seem effective in the short term.

...
...
...


Btw - cosmetic methods do not address or solve a deep rooted problem. The root cause of a problem has to be addressed.

Question arises -
DOES the SC stricture necessarily solve this problem, in any which ways, in either of the - a) short-to-medium, b) medium or, c) long term ?

We shall see in the next couple of years.

Yet... there are every likelihood that those sort of people who drink by the way-side and later totter unsteadily on the highways... thereby inviting/ getting into some fatal accidents... those cumulative numbers might see some sort of a decline, at best. In that sense... this sounds good.

...
...

This MUST be aptly understood.

And... steps take to address the root cause, sooner... the better.


FEW POSERS -

a) Does it not make sense for the central and state Govts. to have proper state and national highway patrols and traffic police outpost every 5/ 10/ 15/ 20/ 25 km away in the accident prone or proven areas ?

Manned with breathe analyzers ?

This might result in at least 1.5-3-7 lakhs of new jobs to be created. Which might help sustain 18-36-50 lakh of people.

b) To have speed limitations to be strictly enforced. ( Case of Yamuna expressway... where over-speeding is resulting in many deaths )

c) Need for over-speeding detectors ?

< EoP >