Address complexities

THE TRIBUNE DEBATE: Hit-and-run penal provision

THE truckers’ protest against the hit-and-run clause in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) underscores the critical issue of road safety in India. Examining hit-and-run accidents from the perspective of the victim and the accused, with the sole focus being on human error, is not enough. The punitive measures in Section 106(1) of the BNS lack the depth needed to address the complexities. The Indian Penal Code, dating back to 1860, is ill-equipped to penalise drivers for accidents in the age of expressways.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita leans towards punishment rather than prevention, overlooking the state’s role in creating safe road infrastructure.

Understanding the science behind road accidents is paramount as the accidents may involve both parties as victims (due to faulty roads or vehicles) or both as the accused. Road crashes happen due to the failure of any of the three sub-systems — road and road environment, vehicles and humans.

A loaded truck weighing 12 tonnes, travelling at 50 km/h, transfers eight times greater impact force than a 1.5-1.7-tonne car travelling at the same speed. The truck driver is often held as the prime accused — irrespective of who crashed into whom — due to lack of investigation expertise and rigour.

The hit-and-run provision in the BNS raises a question: how does an individual ascertain the highway jurisdiction? Additionally, there is ambiguity regarding who to inform in the event of an accident and how to go about it. Determining whether the incident resulted from rash and negligent driving also poses a challenge; the criterion and supporting evidence for making such a determination remain unclear. Even a truck moving within the prescribed lane at a speed of 50 km/hour without rash and negligent driving can be involved in a serious and fatal accident if hit by a two-wheeler rider not wearing a helmet.

Addressing these concerns is crucial for the effective implementation of the law. Further clarification is required on jurisdictional boundaries, accident reporting guidelines and a transparent process for determining the nature of driving behaviour. Without a comprehensive understanding of these aspects, the new law remains incomplete and raises practical challenges in its application.

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways’ report on ‘Road Accidents in India’ (2022) reveals that hit-and-run cases accounted for 14.6 per cent of the accidents and 18.1 per cent of the fatalities that year. The conviction rate in completed trials of hit-and-run cases in 2022 was 47.9 per cent, significantly higher than the 21.8 per cent for other accidents. This indicates the system’s efficiency in hit-and-run cases, emphasising the need for reforms in other areas.

In relation to the victims, 67 per cent were two-wheeler riders, cyclists and pedestrians, primarily from urban areas. India lacks standard design guidelines for highways crossing city limits. Drafts for separate bike lanes and urban highway design standards await finalisation. No state has implemented design standards for non-motorised transport on national highways, as mandated by Section 138 of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019. Proposing punitive measures without embracing the Safe System Approach (SSA) may not yield the desired results.

The SSA recognises road transport as a complex, interdependent system, emphasising holistic solutions by acknowledging human frailty, accepting inevitable mistakes and ensuring that systems can absorb these errors.

In our country where instant punishment is meted out in road accidents, the suspect often faces threats from mobs, potential theft of goods or the spectre of witnessing his vehicle being set ablaze, leaving him little choice but to flee. Truckers face a big problem due to their vehicle’s size, which limits their ability to assist. Unlike drivers of smaller vehicles, it is challenging for a truck driver to transport a victim to the nearest hospital.

Tracking truck drivers in hit-and-run incidents proves comparatively manageable. In the majority of the cases, it’s the driver who flees the scene without the truck, unlike drivers of smaller vehicles like cars. It’s crucial to recognise that truck drivers are generally not inclined to abandon a valuable asset like a truck, which may cost Rs 50 lakh or more, along with goods worth lakhs of rupees. Circumstances, rather than the driver’s inclination, often compel him to run away.

India, as a signatory to the Stockholm Declaration, aims to halve road fatalities and serious injuries by 2030. The declaration emphasises the inevitability of human error in accidents. The new law leans towards punishment rather than prevention, overlooking the state’s role in creating safe road infrastructure.

Crash investigations under Rule 150 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 2022, or Section 135 of the Motor Vehicle (Amendment) Act, 2019, are yet to see effective implementation. Despite multiple reminders by the Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety, an accurate determination of the root cause of accidents is hindered by the lack of trained manpower and technology.

Despite 36 crore registered vehicles, a 63-lakh-km road network and around 8,000 cities and towns, half of the Indian states lack a proper highway patrol system. Less than 60,000 police personnel manage traffic for the entire country. Notably, no university in the country offers a professional degree in road crash investigation.

As India aspires to become a $5-trillion economy, recognising the pivotal role of production and transportation, especially with 85 per cent of freight transported via roads, is imperative. Strict legal action against truck drivers, regardless of the fault or in the absence of a mechanism to find the actual fault, may lead to significant consequences. The potential scenario of numerous truck drivers — who are contributors to the economy — facing trials raises concerns about the continuity of goods transportation.

While underscoring the significance of accountability and road safety, addressing hit-and-run cases demands a nuanced and empathetic approach. The government should meticulously evaluate the situation, taking into account the repercussions, before enforcing stringent measures focused solely on punishing drivers, especially of trucks. Striking a balance between accountability and the safeguarding of truck drivers’ rights remains a challenge.

Views are personal