Bol Fd.docx

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

FINAL DRAFT BASICS OF LEGISLATIONS

Topic: Curb on Unnecessary Use of heightened protection and Red Beacons on Official Vehicles

Submitted to:

Submitted by:

Mr. C.M. Jariwala, Dean

Ribhu Garg

Mr. Anil Sain

Roll no. 98

Faculty of Law

Semester II, Section B BA. LL.B (hons.)

1 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I want to express uncommon much obliged and appreciation to my educators – Prof. C.M. Jariwala and Asst. Prof. Mr. Anil Sain, who gave me the brilliant chance to finalize this glorious research subject "Curb on Unnecessary Use of heightened protection and Red Beacons on Official Vehicles" which has helped me to gather an insight of the facts, issues, judgments in various cases related to the same and relevant legislatures in existence. All through the exploration period, I have been guided by my educator at whatever point I confronted any obstacles or was in a state of daze not having the capacity to resolve the intricacies of the subject.

I want to thank my University, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow, for giving me the opportunity to be a part of a novel exploration turned educational program which without a doubt helps the comprehension of the subject.

I likewise want to thank my guardians, guides and well-wishers who have been a consistent underpin and have sufficient energy and again looked into my work and have give their experiences on the matter.

-Ribhu Garg

2 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER Initiation Judgment Motor Vehicles Act and Central Motor Vehicles Rules Notification 52(E) of Ministry of Road Transport and Highway Conclusion Bibliography

PAGE 4 6 9 12 14 15

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 3

INITIATION Despite many cases, writ petitions and public interest litigations relating to unwanted use of security, symbols like beacons, insignia, etc. at public expenses, undertaken, A special leave petition filed by Abhay Singh, against the order of division bench of Allahabad High Court (W.P. Abhay Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.), in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, titled Abhay Singh v. Union of India and Ors.1, became one of the first landmark judgments in the field of judicial activism against frivolous V.I.P status used by dignitaries and government officials. A division bench comprised by Hon’ble Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice C. Nagappan ordered with immediate effect removal and limit of Red Beacons with only Dignitaries holding constitutional posts and ordered apposite amendments in the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 and various State Motor Vehicles Rules. Special Reference to Rule 108(3) as exception was given as this section deals with dignitaries and officials eligible for using Beacons on their official vehicles. This subject also deals with Article 14, 18 and 38 of the Constitution of India because use of red beacons and other insignia as well as heightened protection at public expense demarcates the bearer as a V.I.P and creates a rift of superiority-inferiority between citizens holding government offices and normal citizens. The abovementioned case also questions the constitutionality of – 

Use of red beacons and sirens by persons other than constitutional functionaries.



Provision of Security to persons other than constitutional functionaries without corresponding increase in sanctioned strength and without a specific assessment of threat.2

And other miscellaneous perquisites available to V.I.Ps.

The learned court also mulled over the misuse of such magnanimity by the government as the learned Amicus Curiae submitted that “the use of red light with or without flasher on the top of government vehicles allotted to a large body of public 1 2

Abhay Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh Ibid, p.7

4 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

representatives and civil servants has become a status symbol and those using such vehicles treat themselves as a class different ordinary citizens. According to him, the widespread use of red-lights on government vehicles in the country is reflective of the mentality of those who served British Government in India and treated the natives as slaves.”3

3

Ibid, p.13

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 5

JUDGMENT (ABHAY SINGH V. UNION OF INDIA)

This case was initiated as Special Leave Petition filed against order passed by Divisional Bench of Allahabad High Court concerning quashing of withdrawal of ZGrade security to a Pramod Tiwari. Leading Sr. Counsel Sh. Harish Salve who later turned Amicus to the court raised various questions of constitutional importance, one of them being, whether the Constitution contemplates categorization of citizens into groups with varied priority and whether the entitlement to use signs and symbols of authority, such red beacons, convoys/escorts and insignia by bureaucrats or persons, who hold public offices under the States or the Union of India, is in contrast with the spirit of the constitution and the basic feature of republicanism embodied in the Constitution.4 In light of the issues raised by the learned counsel concerning constitutionality of permission to use of signs and symbols of administrative authority, grant of security by ways of pilots and escorts and other means, grant of heightened protection to persons other than those, holding important constitutional positions or those with reasonable justification, as well as re-affirming state’s obligation to alter the constitutional ethos for the pleasure of the few, or to provide such treatment to every citizen irrespective of any position held in the government or not or any other factor, and whether the same are in violation of Article 14, 18 and 38 of the Constitution of India, the learned court directed the Central and State Governments to issue a fresh list of people eligible for using red beacons on their vehicles and asked them to amend the rule within a time frame of three months. The court issued the following directions 5 to Central and State Governments along with the judgment: 

Furnish details of expenditure incurred on provision of security to persons other than those holding constitutional offices like the President, Prime Minister, Governor, etc.



Furnish details of personnel deployed for security of persons (and their families) referred in the above paragraph.

4 5

Ibid p. 2 Ibid p. 6-7

6 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW



Furnish details of persons facing criminal charges, charges of violation of any law and also fall in the above mentioned category.



Furnish details of private individuals who avail security at public expenses in lieu of payment made by them or otherwise.



Furnish details of review undertaken of persons falling under the abovementioned category.



Filing of copies of rules/order, which authorize the use of road-blocks for V.I.P visits.

Further arguments propounded by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner were regarding the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, The Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 and rules made by the state governments. The counsel invoked 108 and 119 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 (which are later discussed in detail in the following chapters) and proposed increment in the fine for violation of these provisions. He rightly pointed out that despite various restrictions by central government on use of Red Beacons vide rule 108 (3) and 119 (3), numerous public representatives at various levels in states are indulging in audacious violation of the restrictions and making a mockery of the object of the aforementioned sections, however, in opposition, learned Solicitor General, Mr. Mohan Parasaran argued that the court cannot impose restriction on the power of central government to limit the definition and quantity of “high dignitaries”. He further submitted that there is no illegality committed by the state in allowing few vehicles carrying government officials, with using red beacons as they are conducive for effective discharge of their duties. So was further elaborated by learned Additional Solicitor General Siddharth Luthra.

6

The court in it’s point-wise judgment on issues propounded by learned Amicus Mr. Harish Salve, conveyed – Regarding the issue of use of multi-toned horns in violation of Rule 119 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 and corresponding state rules, keeping in mind the exceptions quoted in Rule 119(3), the Governments shall impose and implement prohibition on the use of the same, impose exemplary fines on violation of the same and ensure efficacious enforcement by concerned authorities. 6

Ibid p. 13

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 7

Regarding use of Red Beacons on Vehicles, respecting the view of authors of the constitution, of treating those occupying constitutional positions of significance as a special category 7 , as manifested by Rule 108(3) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, however, with the spirit of not compromising with the dignity of ordinary citizens and to do away with the superiority complex generating thereof.

The court also held: 1. The term “high dignitaries” mentioned in rule 108(3) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 includes various constitutional posts. 2. Use of Red Beacons with or without flasher by ‘high dignitaries’ is permitted only when on duty and not otherwise. 3. The State Governments and Union Territory Administration cannot transcend the purview of ‘High Dignitaries” beyond that, specified in clauses ‘c’ and ‘d’ of Notifications dated 11.1.2002 a d 28.7.2005 issued by the Central Government.8 4. Exceptions mentioned in rule 119(3) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 such as ambulances, police vehicles used as escorts or pilots or for law and order duties are entitled to have lights of colors other than red. E.g. Multicolored, blue, white, etc. 5. Excluding those mentioned in the preceding paragraph, no vehicle shall be permitted to bear multi-toned horns producing unduly harsh, shrill and alarming noise. 6. Enforcement of amended provisions of rule 108 and 119 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 by police personnel without fear or favour and imposing apposite penalties on those found violating the same is imperative. 7. Emanation of contents of this order through a notification in newspapers of all States and Union Territories by their respective Chief Secretaries shall be caused.

7 8

Ibid P. 34 Ibid P. 36

8 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 AND CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES RULES 1989 The Motor Vehicles Act was enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to motor vehicles. The Act of 1988 is a replacement of Motor Vehicles Act 1939, which in turn replaced the initial legislation on regulation of road transport vehicles, the Motor Vehicles Act 1914. This act has been amended from time to time to keep the enactment updated as per contemporary requirements and features of its subject matter. This enactment was initiated after a collaborated effort of various committees and the Law Commission, Members of Parliament (for constituting a working group to look into the issue), and suggestions of the Supreme Court. 9 For execution of the will of legislature relating to regulation of motor vehicles, The Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 was established by the Central Government of India and corresponding rules by counterparts in State Governments. These were imperative for implementing and giving force to legislative provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988.

The Following are parts of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, relevant to the research topic: Rule 10810 - Use Of Red, White Or Blue Light (1) No motor vehicle shall show a red light to the front or light other than red to rear: Provided that the provisions of tills rule shall not apply to— i.

The internal lighting of the vehicle; or

ii.

The amber light, if displayed by any direction indicator or top light or as top light used on vehicle for operating within the premises like airports, ports without going outside the said premises on to public roads;

iii.

A vehicle carrying high dignitaries as specified by the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, from time to time;

9

“Introduction”, The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. Rule 108, Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.

10

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 9

iv.

The blinker type of red light with purple glass fitted to an ambulance van used for carrying patients; or

v.

To a vehicle having a lamp fitted with an electrical bulb, if the power of the bulb does not exceed seven watts and the lamp is fitted with frosted glass or any other material which has the effect of diffusing the light;

vi.

White light illuminating the rear number plate;

vii.

White light used while reversing;

viii.

Plough light provided in agricultural tractors for illuminating the implement's working area on the ground in agricultural field operations.

(2) Use of blue light with flasher shall be determined and notified by the State Governments at their discretion. (3) Use of blue light with or without flasher shall be permitted as top light on vehicles escorting high dignitaries entitled to the use of red light. (4) Use of multi-colored red, blue and white light shall be permitted only on vehicles specifically designated for emergency duties and shall be specifically specified by State Governments. (5) The State Government shall inform the Central Government regarding publication of notifications issued by the concerned State Government under sub-rule (2) and under clause (e) of the Notification No. S.O. 52(E), dated 11th January 2002, published in the Gazette of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, regarding use of red light on top of vehicle being used by dignitaries. (6) In case vehicle is not carrying dignitaries, red or blue light, as the case may be, light shall not be used and be covered by black cover.

1 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 0

Rule 11911 - Horns (2) No Motor Vehicle shall be fitted with any multi-toned horn giving a succession of different tones or with any other sound-producing device giving an unduly harsh, shrill, loud or alarming noise. (3) Nothing contained in sub-rule (2) shall prevent the use on vehicles used as ambulance or for fire-fighting or salvage purposes or on vehicles (used by police officers or operators of construction equipment vehicles or officers of the Motor Vehicles Department, in the course of their duties or on construction equipment vehicles, of such sound signals as may be approved by the registering authority in whose jurisdiction such vehicles are kept.

In relation to the case of Abhay Singh (discussed above), Learned Sr. Counsel Harish Salve pointed out that the Legislature and Central and State Administrations have not made apposite efforts to amend the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules enacted in 1988 and 1989 resp. and place them in conformity with contemporary outlook of the citizens as hitherto a small section considers itself to be privileged and superior to ordinary citizens. Such absent-mindedness on the part of the government has led to misuse of such privileges and has evoked a need to radically curtail use of such beacons so people’s right to freedom of movement is not restricted in any manner.

The learned court envisioned curb on the menace of rampant and frivolous use of beacons by directing the Central and State Governments to make amendments in its rules and issue a fresh, shorter list of official delegates, in genuine justification for use of beacons, and also impose increased amounts of fines on subsequent violators12.

11 12

Rule 119, Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 Abhay Singh v. Union of India, p. 7-8

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 1 1

NOTIFICATION

NO.

52(E)

OF

MINISTRY

OF

ROAD

TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS The Central Government of India (Ministry of Road Transport and Highway), in pursuance of enforcement of powers vested in it by Rule 108 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 issued Notification No. 52(E) dated 11-01-2002, which was later amended by Notification No. 1070(E)13 dated 28-07-2005. The notification provides a list of vehicles carrying government officials who are permitted to use beacons while on duty i.e. classified as ‘High Dignitaries” under Rule 108(3) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989. The same reads as under14: (a) Red Beacon (with flasher) on the top front of the vehicle, while on duty anywhere in the country:  President  Vice-president  Chief Justice of India  Prime Minister  Deputy Prime Minister  Justices of the Supreme Court  Speaker of the Lok Sabha  Cabinet Ministers of the Union  Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission  Leaders of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha  Chief Justices of High Courts Within & Outside their respective jurisdictions  Justices of High Courts Within & outside their respective jurisdictions  Governors of States within and outside their respective States.  Lt. Governors of Union Territories within their respective Territories.  Chief Ministers of States Within and outside their respective States.  Cabinet Ministers of states within their respective States. 13 14

Ibid, p. 31 Notification no. 52(E) dated 11.1.2002, Ministry of Road and Transport, Government of India

1 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 2

(b) Red Beacon (without flasher): • Chief Election Commissioner • Comptroller and Auditor General of India • Deputy Chairman, Rajya Sabha • Deputy Speaker, Lok Sabha • Ministers of the State of the Union • Members of the Planning Commission • CBDT Chairman • Attorney General of India • Cabinet Secretary • Chief Commissioner of Income Tax • Chiefs of Staff of the three services holding the rank of full General or equivalent rank • Deputy Ministers of the Union Officiating Chiefs of Staff of the three services holding the rank of Lt. General or equivalent rank

(c) Amber Beacon: 

Chief Secretary



Commissioner of Income Tax



Additional Commissioner of Income Tax



Director General of Police



District Magistrate

(d) Blue Beacon: 

Police vehicles



Ambulances

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 1 3

CONCLUSION

Following the directions of the Supreme Court, the State government has specified officials entitled to use beacons on their official vehicles. The Transport Department has come out with a list of vehicles on which red and blue lights can be used. The apex court has asked all State governments to drastically cut the VIPs’ list for use of beacons in their cars and to limit the facility to the heads of political executive, the legislature, the judiciary and persons holding constitutional posts.

The SC also banned pressure horns, multiple sound emitting horns and musical horns in vehicles. It had said the red light has become a status symbol and that police personnel, who are put on duty for giving security cover to VIPs, should be deployed for better purposes like making the roads safe for women.

According to the notification issued by the Transport Department, the Governor of the State, the Chief Minister and Ministers of Council of Ministers, the chairman of the Legislative Council, the Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly, the Chief Justice and sitting judges of the High Court of Karnataka are eligible to use red beacons on their official vehicles.

The notification comes under Rule 108 of the Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1989, that empowers the State to specify the dignitaries and the vehicles on which the red lights can be used, official sources told The Hindu. The notification was issued on June 7 following rampant misuse of those lights. The Supreme Court expressed indignation over such misuse. The department has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court stating that it had listed dignitaries to use VIP red lights on their official vehicles.

1 DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 4

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abhay Singh v. Union of India, Available at. www.judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=41060

The Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Available at. www.morth.nic.in/writereaddata/mainlinkFile/File672.pdf The Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1999, Available at. www.tn.gov.in/sta/Cmvr1989.pdf Notification no. 52(E) dated 11.1.2002, Ministry of Road and Transport, Government of India, Available at. www.delhi.gov.in/DoIT/DoIT_Transport/trrs29.pdf

DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW 1 5