Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
SONALI KARWASRA ..... Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person.
Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Mr.Kamal Digpaul and Ms. Swati Kwatra, Advocates for Respondent
No.1 & 3/ UOI.
Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Panwar, Mr. Utkarsh Singh and
Mr.Tapesh Raghav, Advocates for Respondent No.2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), and the Petitioner has shown serious concern with respect to imposition of fine for violation of various statutory provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Digitaaly subsequent amendment to it, i.e., the Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act,
2019.
2. The Petitioner’s contention is that the infrastructure in respect of technology for detection of violation of traffic rules is not in consonance with international standards. Further, the same is not standardized throughout the country and no information/ minimal information is available with respect to the operation/ limitation/ errand/ challenges in respect of the technology which is being used. The Petitioner has stated that there are various instances where hefty fines have been levied upon innocent citizens on account of faulty equipment and technology used by the Traffic Police, and citizens at large are suffering due to the same.
3. The Petitioner has further stated that in a large number of developed countries, there are well-established standards/ rules/ guidelines along with monitoring agencies which efficiently monitor traffic violations and implement vehicular law. It has been submitted by the Petitioner that in our country, the technical equipment purchased and deployed to enforce laws concerning motor vehicles is done so without considering any standards/ guidelines. Further, several lacunae exist with respect to the manner of functioning of monitoring agencies as well as when it comes to efficient implementation of laws.
4. The Petitioner has further stated that the equipments used to detect violation of traffic lights are sub-standard. They are not based on updated technology, which is resulting in erroneous imposition of fines on the common man. Digitaaly
5. The Petitioner has further stated that the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was previously amended in 1994 and now has been amended through the Amendment Act of 2019. However, the speed limit violation detection technology, the drunken driving breath analyzing technology and the redlight violation technology are not in sync with the changing times. It was submitted that there is a need for more advanced technology.
6. The Petitioner has further stated that no guidelines have been implemented with respect to the technology relied upon by Traffic officials to detect violations. It is submitted that the same is creating a lacuna in the infrastructure of the system relied upon. It is stated that the lacunae created due to the infrastructure and the subsisting system is leading to an arbitrary imposition of fines upon innocent citizens who in fact abide by traffic rules. It has been further stated that the equipment used by the Traffic Police is neither calibrated nor maintained, thereby resulting in errors in detection of traffic violations.
7. The Petitioner has stated that after the amendment of the Motor Vehicles Act in 2019, it was anticipated that the Amendment Act will provide an efficient, safe and corruption free system in the country. However, the implementation of the same throughout the country has shown that there is an increase in instances of faulty systems for detection of speed violations, red light violations, drunken driving, etc.
8. The Petitioner has filed various reports stating that the challans issued have been recalled in bulk. It is stated that the traffic department had to call back more than 1.[5] Lakh challans issued on account of over-speeding on just one highway stretch in the NCR area alone. It has been further stated that in Digitaaly one case, fine to the tune of Rs. 2,00,500/- was imposed upon a Truck driver for overloading near Mukarba Chowk in Delhi. It has been further contended that there are no checks on what basis the challans are issued and there is no monitoring agency which can effectively monitor implementation of the statutory provisions under the Act.
9. The Petitioner has further stated that the documents relating to motor vehicles such as registration certificate, driving license, insurance can be made available on Parivahan App or Digi locker App, and they should be treated as legally recognized proof at par with original documents. The Petitioner, at the same time, has stated that the documents which are on Digi locker/ various Apps have been recognized and accepted by the Traffic Police. However, every police personnel should have a mobile compatible to access the relevant App to verify the authenticity of the driving license and other documents. The Petitioner has also pointed out several difficulties which are being faced by the traffic police personnel and offenders even though the documents are available on mobile Apps/ Digi Locker and she has placed newspaper clippings on record to buttress her averments.
10. The Petitioner has also raised concerns in respect of spot challans where the offenders are being penalised for violation of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the subsequent amendment which is in force. It is the Petitioner’s contention that the traffic officials should wear a body camera. She has stated that though the traffic officials have been ordered to wear body cameras while issuing challans, the same is not being followed.
11. The Petitioner has further stated that the speed violation or red light violation equipments have not been placed at proper locations and they Digitaaly should be placed at proper locations in order to ensure that the public at large is not made to suffer. The Petitioner has stated that the Breath Analyzers used by the Traffic Police suffers from medically and scientifically established errors and the traffic police have no formal training for utilizing the same. Therefore, proper steps should be taken in the matter for standardization/ calibration of such equipments and the Traffic Police should also be trained.
12. It has been submitted by the Petitioner that certain Traffic signals are fixed at such places that they are obstructed and not visible, thereby leading to people violating the obstructed signal and being imposed a fine upon. Therefore, steps should be taken to remove all such defects in order to ensure that the traffic lights are visible to all those persons who are using motor vehicles. The Petitioner has given some examples of violation of traffic signals and the difficulty faced by the public at large. In respect of speed, it has been reiterated by the Petitioner that the Radar Technology used by the Delhi Traffic Police is not in conformity with the international standards and there exists a need to revisit the technology and implement standardization of the same. There are some stray examples given by the Petitioner in respect of the challans issued by the Traffic personnel and the Petitioner has also given various suggestions in respect of Red Light Jumping, Road Sign Error, Radar Coverage, Multiple Vehicle Radar Speed Meters. Further, several other suggestions for improving the infrastructure, imposition of fine and effective implementation of traffic laws so that the common man is not wrongly levied a challan upon have also been put forth. Digitaaly
13. In light of the submissions put forth, the Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
14. A detailed reply has been filed by the Union of India on affidavit and paragraph 4 of the said affidavit reads as under:
15. In the affidavit, lastly, it has been stated that implementation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 comes under the purview of the State Transport Authorities & Union Territory Administration. Once the Rules are in place, the same have to be strictly adhered to.
16. Learned Counsel for the GNCTD has argued before this Court that the Government of Delhi is ensuring a strict compliance of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the subsequent amendment, i.e., Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 was introduced to bring rules in the area of road safety. It was submitted that the same was effectuated to bring citizen facilitation, transparency and to reduce corruption with the help of Information Technology. He has stated that the amendment which was brought in the Motor Vehicles Act has been implemented in Delhi and the most sophisticated equipments are being used by the Traffic Police in the Digitaaly matter of detection of violation of statutory provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with the Motor Vehicles Rules framed there under.
17. Learned Counsel has vehemently argued before this Court that the Government of Delhi is strictly adhering to the relevant statutory provisions and Standard Operating Procedure issued by the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways on 17.12.2018 in respect of validation of Driving Licenses, Registration Certificates and other transport related documents. It has been submitted that the documents are available in electronic form and on Mobile Application Platforms, and the same are being accepted by the Traffic Police. At no point of time has any individual been harassed for not having a physical copy of documents. It has also stated that the notification dated 11.08.2021 issued by the Ministry for electronic monitoring and enforcement of road safety is also being strictly adhered to and the question of any deviation from the same does not arise.
18. Ld. Counsel for the GNCTD has brought to the notice of this Court that Breath Analyzers are being calibrated from time to time and other equipments are also subject to periodical check-ups. It has been stated that even the imposition of fine & payment of fine in Delhi is being done electronically with a view to reduce human intervention. It has been stated that the prayers made by the Petitioner vide this PIL have already been looked into and the Petitioner’s genuine grievances have already been addressed by the Union of India and the Delhi Traffic Police. He has also assured this Court that the Traffic Police shall also welcome any other positive suggestion made by the public at large/ Petitioner in order to further improve the system which is in place. Digitaaly
19. This Court has carefully gone through the Writ Petition and the reply filed by the Respondents. Most of the Petitioner’s grievances, as expressed in the Writ Petition, are genuine. They relate to issuance of safety challans, safety of the public at large and genuine difficulties which are being faced by the citizens with respect to the manner of implementation of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.
20. The Petitioner has shown serious concern in the matter of imposition of fine for violation of statutory provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and subsequent amendment Act i.e., Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act,
2019. To bring transparency in the matter of imposition of challans - high speed cameras, closed-circuit television cameras, speed guns and body wearable cameras have been introduced vide amendment of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, through Section 136A.
21. Section 136A of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 reads as under: “136A. Electronic monitoring and enforcement of road safety (1) The State Government shall ensure electronic monitoring and enforcement of road safety in the manner provided under sub-section(2) on national highways, State highways, roads or in any urban city within a State which has a population upto such limits as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (2) The Central Government shall make rules for the electronic monitoring and enforcement of road safety including speed cameras, closed-circuit television cameras, speed guns, body wearable cameras and such other technology. Explanation: For the purpose of this section, the expression “body wearable camera” means a mobile audio and video capture device worn on the body or uniform of a person authorized by the State Government.” Digitaaly
22. The Central Government has amended the relevant Rules too. These Rules are known as Central Motor Vehicles (Fourteenth Amendment) Rules,
2018. The amendment to the Rules permits the driver to carry documents in digital form also. The Government of India has subsequently issued a notification dated 17.12.2018 for accepting driving licenses, registration certificates and other transport related information presented in electronic form and the said notification issued is reproduced as under:
1. Principal Secretaries/ Secretaries, Department of Transport of all States/ UTs;
2. Directors General Police of all States/ UTs;
3. Transport Commissioners of all States/ UT Administrations Subject: Acceptance of Driving License, Registration Certificate and other transport related information presented in Electronic form. Subject: Acceptance of Driving Licence, Registration Certificate and other transport related information presented in Electronic form. Madam/ Sir, I am directed to refer to this Ministry's letter dated 8th August, 2018 and 19th November, 2018, and to say that this Ministry has received a number of representations about the mechanism to be adopted by traffic/ transport related enforcement agencies to validate or impound documents in case the citizens produce documents in an Electronic Form. Digitaaly
2. In view of the above, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP),as annexed, may be adopted for ensuring compliance with the provisions of rule 139 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
3. This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Dharka R. Lulkang) Under Secretary to the Govt. of India”
23. Not only this, but a Standard Operating Procedure is also in existence, also dated 17.12.2018. The same makes it very clear that in case a person has certificates in a digital form, the same is acceptable to the authorities. A very exhaustive SOP is in place and the same has been framed so that the citizens do not face any difficulty in case they have their relevant documents in digital form.
24. Various amendments have been issued, as reflected from the short affidavit filed by Respondent No. 1 to ensure that the driver is not required to carry original documents with him, and that documents are accepted in digital form by all the authorities. The reply also reveals that the Government of Delhi is strictly adhering to all statutory provisions and the Standard Operating Procedure issued by the Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways dated 17.12.2018 in respect of validation of driving license, registration certificates and other transport related documents. The notification dated 11.08.2021 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has also been issued for electronic monitoring and enforcement of road safety. The Delhi Government is strictly adhering to the same. Digitaaly
25. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that so far as the Union Territory of Delhi is concerned, challans are being issued and fines are being paid through electronic mode only. The Delhi Model in respect of recovery of fines is also being adopted by other States in the country. So far as the State of Delhi is concerned, as reflected from the reply, the use of Information Technology has been incorporated, in order to ensure that a citizen is not harassed in the matter of payment of fine and time is not wasted in the same. Therefore, at this juncture, in light of the aforesaid discussion, findings, submissions and documents on record, this Court is of the opinion that no further orders are required to be passed in the present PIL. However, the GNCTD shall ensure strict compliance of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and subsequent amendments along with the aforesaid SOP issued on 17.12.2018.
26. In light of the aforesaid, the PIL stands disposed of. (SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)
CHIEF JUSTICE (SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD)