0

State to ensure rigorous enforcement of prohibition of slow moving vehicles on Delhi NCT expressways – Delhi High Court

Coram : Chief Justice Sanjeev Narula

 

Order date : 17th October, 2023

 

Introduction :

 

A PIL was filed in the hon’ble Delhi High Court to address concerns over slow moving vehicles on the expressway prohibiting high-speed throughfare.

 

Facts:

 

The PIL filed by the petitioner stated that the purpose of the expressway is deteriorated when the slow moving vehicles clogs the roads and also jeopardizes public safety. The PIL intrinsically connects the right to safer travel with that of broad interpretation of right to life and personal liberty.

It was observed that the genesis of the PIL can be traced back to the petitioner’s personal experiences who has been commuting in the Delhi-Gurugram Expressway which is a segment of NH-48. The petitioner claims that the presence of slow moving vehicles in the expressway has significantly increased and has caused multitude of accidents resulting in loss of life and property damage. The petitioner had approached various authorities such as the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) who has confirmed the prohibition of slow moving vehicles. NHAI came with an agreement with DCP- Gurugram (respondents 5) which stated that vehicles like tractors, carts, and two-three wheelers are explicitly barred.

NHAI reports between 2017-2022 produced data that 31 fatalities have been caused because of slow moving vehicles along with 137 grave accidents in the expressway. The petitioner also refers to the HC of Karnataka which refrained  two wheelers to use highways and insisted on using the service roads. The petitioner has filed the PIL on the ground that there is a lack of adherence to traffic norms and road regulations.

Courts Analysis and Judgement:

The court took cognizance of the issue and stated that it is of utmost importance to ensure that traffic rules and regulations are strictly enforced. The court also noticed that the NHAI has observed the alarmingly increasing slow moving vehicles in the expressway causing frequent accidents.

It was stated that that the prohibition of two-wheelers, three-wheelers, tractors and animal driven vehicles are done primarily to ensure the safety of all road users and use the express way effectively. It has been noted that there is a regulatory framework for providing safety measures but the problem persists in the enforcement and adherence.

The court directed the state to rigorously enforce the existing prohibitions with respect to slow moving vehicles. In furtherance, it was held that providing an additional specific lane would be filled with complexities upon the policy considerations.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Sushant Kumar Sharma

Click here to view judgement

0
sc of india21

Supreme Court’s Firm Stance: Prioritizing Justice and Compliance in Bail Proceedings

Title: Gulab Singh vs State Of Haryana & Another

Citation: CRM-M-52639-2023

Corum: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Decided on: 17.10.2023

Introduction:

This case appears to involve allegations of assault and threats made against Azad Singh’s father by a group of individuals including Sandeep Singh and the application for anticipatory bail for some of the co-accused is being discussed in the Co-ordinate bench. In this case Supreme Court made several key observations and issued a directions based on the circumstances.

Facts:

In this case, the FIR has been filed based on a statement given by Azad Singh, a resident of Ballu. Azad Singh and his elder uncle, Sh. Arjun Singh, were going to their fields in a buggy, following Azad’s father on a motorcycle for grass cutting. While they were near their field, a motor cycle and a car stopped in front of their fields and a group of individuals, including Sandeep Singh, Methab Singh, Lakha Singh and Gurlal Singh arrived at a scene. These individuals were armed with swords and sticks. The group of individuals began beating Azad Singh’s father. Azad Singh states that they had filed court cases against Sandeep Singh previously, resulting in a sentence for him. Sandeep Singh had been pressuring them to compromise on these cases.

Azad Singh alleges that the group of individuals including Sandeep Singh and people had wrongfully injured his father and seeks legal action against them. Regarding the anticipatory bail applications, it is mentioned that the second anticipatory bail applications of co-accused, Sukha Singh and Lakhwinder Singh, have been entertained by the Co-ordinate Bench, and interim protection has been granted in their cases on specific dates.

COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT:

The case involves the petitioner filing an application for anticipatory bail. The Supreme Court criticized the High Court’s stance that the previous anticipatory might have been withdrawn instead of being considered onits merits. The principle of res judicata should not be applied to an application for bail. The Supreme Court concluded that the earlier order 07.03.2017 should be ser aside. The case would stand revived before the High Court and the matter would be listed for consideration on 03.04.2017 in accordance with the law.

The judgment emphasizes that the facts and circumstances of the instant case are entirely different. It accuses the petitioner of attempting to mislead the court by concealing the fact of an order dated 17.08.2022, which required the petitioner to surrender within a week. The petitioner had not complied with this order. The judgment also notes that the stay on proceedings before the trial court, granted under Section 319 Cr.P.C., was only issued on 28.10.2022. The court suggests that had the petitioner surrendered, they could have applied for regular bail, and the High Court might have directed the trial court to expeditiously consider the regular bail application within three days.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written By- Gauri Joshi

Click here to view judgement

1 10 11 12