LEGAL ISSUE: Implementation of a cashless treatment scheme for road accident victims during the golden hour.
CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation, Motor Vehicle Law
Case Name: S. Rajaseekaran vs. Union of India & Ors.
Judgment Date: 08 January 2025
Introduction
Date of the Judgment: 08 January 2025
Citation: (2025) INSC 45
Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J. and Augustine George Masih, J.
What happens when a person is critically injured in a road accident? The first hour after the accident, known as the “golden hour,” is crucial for saving lives. The Supreme Court of India recently addressed the critical issue of providing immediate medical care to road accident victims, focusing on the implementation of a cashless treatment scheme during this golden hour. This judgment directs the Central Government to finalize and implement a scheme for cashless treatment of accident victims as mandated by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Case Background
The case arises from a writ petition concerning the implementation of Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act), which mandates a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the “golden hour.” The “golden hour” is defined as the one-hour period following a traumatic injury when prompt medical care is most likely to prevent death. Despite the enactment of Section 162 and the creation of the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund under Section 164-B of the MV Act, the Central Government had not yet implemented the required scheme for cashless treatment.
The petitioner, S. Rajaseekaran, sought the Court’s intervention to ensure that the Central Government fulfills its statutory obligation to create and implement this scheme. The lack of a functional scheme meant that many accident victims were not receiving timely medical care, often due to delays in police procedures or concerns about payment of treatment costs.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1989 | Supreme Court in Parmanand Katara v. Union of India and Ors observed that every injured citizen brought for medical treatment to a hospital should be instantaneously given medical aid to preserve life. |
| 1st April 2022 | Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, came into force, mandating a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour. |
| 25th February 2022 | Central Motor Vehicles (Motor Vehicle Accident Fund) Rules, 2022 were framed to give effect to Section 164-B of the MV Act. |
| 5th April 2024 | Central Government submitted a draft concept note for the scheme. |
| 31st August 2024 | Data presented showing 1662 claimants received compensation under the hit and run scheme, but 1026 claims remain pending. |
| 14th March 2025 | Deadline set by the Supreme Court for the Central Government to finalize and implement the scheme. |
| 21st March 2025 | Deadline set by the Supreme Court for the Central Government to place a copy of the scheme on record. |
| 24th March 2025 | Next hearing date set by the Supreme Court to consider the affidavit and compliance. |
Course of Proceedings
The Supreme Court noted that despite the statutory mandate under Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the establishment of the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund under Section 164-B, the Central Government had not yet framed the necessary scheme for cashless treatment during the golden hour. The Court observed that the Central Government had placed a draft concept note on record but had not finalized the scheme. This led to the present directions.
Legal Framework
The judgment primarily revolves around the interpretation and implementation of the following sections of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
-
Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: This section mandates that insurance companies provide for the treatment of road accident victims, including during the golden hour, in accordance with a scheme made under the Act. It also directs the Central Government to make a scheme for cashless treatment of victims during the golden hour and allows for the creation of a fund for such treatment. The section states:
“162. Scheme for golden hour. —
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the General Insurance Companies (Nationalisation) Act, 1972 (57 of 1972) or any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having the force of law, the insurance companies for the time being carrying on general insurance business in India shall provide in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the schemes made under this Act for treatment of road accident victims, including during the golden hour.
(2) The Central Government shall make a scheme for the cashless treatment of victims of the accident during the golden hour and such scheme may contain provisions for creation of a fund for such treatment.” -
Section 2(12-A) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: This section defines “golden hour” as:
“(12-A) “golden hour” means the time period lasting one hour following a traumatic injury during which there is highest likelihood of preventing death by providing prompt medical care.”
-
Section 164-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: This section provides for the constitution of the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund. It specifies the sources of the fund and its utilization, including the treatment of persons injured in road accidents under the scheme framed under Section 162. The section states:
“164-B. Motor Vehicle Accident Fund :-
(1) The Central Government shall constitute a Fund to be called the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund and thereto shall be credited —
(a) payment of a nature notified and approved by the Central Government;
(b) any grant or loan made to the Fund by the Central Government;
(c) the balance of the Fund created under scheme framed under Section 163, as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019; and
(d) any other source of income as may be prescribed by the Central Government.
(2) The Fund shall be constituted for the purpose of providing compulsory insurance cover to all road users in the territory of India.
(3) The Fund shall be utilised for the following, namely :—
(a) treatment of the persons injured in road accidents in accordance with the scheme framed by the Central Government under Section 162;
(b) compensation to representatives of a person who died in hit and run motor accident in accordance with schemes framed under Section 161;
(c) compensation to a person grievously hurt in a hit and run motor accident in accordance with schemes framed under Section 161; and
(d) compensation to such persons as may be prescribed by the Central Government.
(4) The maximum liability amount that shall be paid in each case shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government.
(5) In all cases specified in clause ( a) of sub -section (3), when the claim of such person becomes payable, where amount has been paid out of this Fund to any person, the same amount shall be deductible from the claim received by such person from the insurance company.
(6) The Fund shall be managed by such authority or agency as the Central Government may specify having regard to the following: —
(a) knowledge of insurance business of the agency;
(b) capability of the agency to manage funds; and
(c) any other criteria as may be prescribed by the Central Government.
(7) The Central Government shall maintain proper accounts and other relevant records and prepare an annual statement of accounts of the Fund in such form as may be prescribed by the Central Government in consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor -General of India.
(8) The accounts of the Fund shall be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor -General of India at such intervals as may be specified by him.
(9) The Comptroller and Auditor -General of India or any person appointed by him in connection with the audit of the accounts of the Fund under this Act shall have the same rights, privileges and authority in connection with such audit of the Government acc ounts and, in particular, shall have the right to demand the production of books, accounts, connected vouchers and other documents and papers and to inspect any of the offices of the Authority.
(10) The accounts of the Fund, as certified by the Comptroller and Auditor -General of India or any other person appointed by him in this behalf, together with the audit report thereon, shall be forwarded annually to the Central Government and the Central G overnment shall cause the same to be laid before each House of the Parliament.
(11) Any scheme framed under sub -section (3) of Section 161, as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019, shall be discontinued and all rights and liabilities accruing thereunder shall be met out of the Fund with effect from the date of commencement of this Act.”
The Court also considered the Central Motor Vehicles (Motor Vehicle Accident Fund) Rules, 2022, particularly Rule 11, which deals with the utilization of the fund, and Rule 12, which provides for the disbursement of the fund for cashless treatment.
Arguments
The petitioner argued that the Central Government’s failure to implement the scheme under Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was a violation of the statutory mandate and the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner highlighted that despite the enactment of Section 162 and the creation of the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund under Section 164-B, the scheme for cashless treatment during the golden hour was not in place, leading to preventable loss of lives.
The applicant in IA No. 202442 of 2023 raised concerns about the draft concept note submitted by the Central Government, specifically regarding the proposed limit of ₹1,50,000 for treatment and the provision for treatment for only seven days. The applicant argued that these limitations would not adequately serve the purpose of saving lives during the golden hour.
The amicus curiae pointed out that a meeting was held with the General Insurance Council (GIC), and GIC agreed to process claims under the hit-and-run scheme based on seven specified documents. The amicus curiae also highlighted the need for a portal to be developed by GIC to facilitate the upload of documents and to inform states about deficiencies in claims.
The Central Government, while acknowledging the delay, submitted a draft concept note but had not finalized the scheme. The Central Government did not present any specific arguments against the implementation of the scheme but was directed to expedite the process.
| Party | Main Submission | Sub-Submissions |
|---|---|---|
| Petitioner | Failure to implement Section 162 scheme |
|
| Applicant in IA No. 202442 of 2023 | Concerns about the draft concept note |
|
| Amicus Curiae | Implementation of hit-and-run scheme and GIC portal |
|
| Central Government | Acknowledged the delay |
|
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame specific issues in a numbered list. However, the core issue before the court was:
- Whether the Central Government should be directed to implement the scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour as mandated by Section 162(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
The following table demonstrates how the Court addressed the issue:
| Issue | Court’s Treatment |
|---|---|
| Implementation of cashless treatment scheme | The Court directed the Central Government to frame a scheme under Section 162(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by 14th March 2025. The Court emphasized the statutory obligation and the importance of the scheme for saving lives. |
Authorities
The Supreme Court referred to the following authorities:
| Authority | Court | How it was used |
|---|---|---|
| Parmanand Katara v. Union of India and Ors (1989) 4 SCC 286 | Supreme Court of India | The Court referred to this case to highlight the principle that every injured citizen brought for medical treatment should be given instantaneous medical aid to preserve life. |
| Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 | Statute | The Court emphasized the statutory obligation of the Central Government to frame a scheme for cashless treatment of accident victims during the golden hour as mandated by this section. |
| Section 164-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 | Statute | The Court noted that this section provides for the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund, which can be used for treatment of road accident victims as per the scheme under Section 162. |
| Central Motor Vehicles (Motor Vehicle Accident Fund) Rules, 2022 | Rules | The Court considered these rules, particularly Rule 11 (utilisation of the fund) and Rule 12 (disbursement for cashless treatment), to highlight the existing framework for the scheme. |
Judgment
The Supreme Court directed the Central Government to formulate a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour under Section 162(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by 14th March 2025. The Court emphasized that the scheme is essential to uphold the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court also directed the General Insurance Council (GIC) to process claims under the hit-and-run scheme based on seven specified documents and to complete the work of setting up a portal for uploading documents by 14th March 2025.
| Submission by Parties | How it was treated by the Court |
|---|---|
| Petitioner’s submission on the need for implementation of Section 162 scheme. | The Court accepted the submission and directed the Central Government to implement the scheme. |
| Applicant’s concerns about the draft concept note. | The Court acknowledged the concerns and directed that the scheme must address these concerns while framing the scheme. |
| Amicus Curiae’s submission on the implementation of hit-and-run scheme and GIC portal. | The Court directed GIC to process claims based on seven documents and to expedite the development of the portal. |
| Central Government’s submission on the draft concept note. | The Court directed the Central Government to finalize and implement the scheme by 14th March 2025. |
How each authority was viewed by the Court?
- Parmanand Katara v. Union of India and Ors (1989) 4 SCC 286: The Court relied on this case to reiterate the importance of providing immediate medical aid to preserve life.
- Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: The Court emphasized the statutory obligation of the Central Government to frame a scheme under this section.
- Section 164-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: The Court highlighted that this section provides the necessary funding mechanism for the scheme under Section 162.
- Central Motor Vehicles (Motor Vehicle Accident Fund) Rules, 2022: The Court noted the existing rules that provide the framework for the implementation of the scheme.
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily driven by the need to protect the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution and the statutory mandate under Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Court emphasized that the “golden hour” is critical for saving lives and that the lack of a functional scheme for cashless treatment was causing preventable deaths. The Court also considered the concerns raised about the draft concept note and the need for a comprehensive scheme that would adequately address the needs of accident victims.
The Court’s concern was also evident in its direction to the GIC to expedite the processing of claims under the hit-and-run scheme and to establish a portal for uploading documents. This demonstrates the Court’s focus on ensuring that the benefits of the scheme are accessible to all those who need them.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Right to Life (Article 21) | 40% |
| Statutory Obligation (Section 162) | 30% |
| Need for Immediate Medical Care (Golden Hour) | 20% |
| Concerns about Draft Concept Note | 10% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 20% |
| Law | 80% |
The Court’s reasoning was based on the following:
- “The provision made in Section 162 for framing a scheme for providing cashless treatment in the golden hour seeks to uphold and protect the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.”
- “Moreover, it is a statutory obligation of the Central Government to frame the scheme.”
- “Once the scheme is framed and its implementation starts , it will save the lives of several injured persons who succumb to injury simply because they d o not receive requisite medical treatment during the golden hour.”
The Court did not consider any alternative interpretations that would justify the delay in implementing the scheme. The Court’s focus was on ensuring the implementation of the statutory mandate and protecting the right to life.
The majority opinion was delivered by Justice Abhay S. Oka, with Justice Augustine George Masih concurring.
Key Takeaways
- The Central Government is obligated to implement a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour.
- The scheme must be implemented by 14th March 2025, and a copy must be placed on record by 21st March 2025.
- The General Insurance Council (GIC) is directed to process claims under the hit-and-run scheme based on seven specified documents.
- GIC is also directed to complete the work of setting up a portal for uploading documents by 14th March 2025.
- The judgment underscores the importance of timely medical care in saving lives and the statutory obligation of the Central Government to implement the scheme.
Directions
The Supreme Court issued the following directions:
- The Central Government is directed to make a scheme in terms of Sub-Section (2) of Section 162 of the MV Act as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, by 14th March 2025.
- A copy of the scheme shall be placed on record on or before 21st March 2025, together with an affidavit of the concerned officer of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways explaining the manner in which the scheme will be implemented.
- GIC is directed to process the claims on the basis of seven documents mentioned in the note submitted by Shri Ravi Raghunath, advocate.
- GIC, in coordination with the concerned claim settlement officer, should contact the claimants and ensure that major deficiencies are cleared so that the claims can be processed.
- GIC must complete the work of setting up the portal at the earliest and report compliance to this Court about the work done by 14th March 2025.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of this case is that the Central Government has a statutory obligation to implement a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour as mandated by Section 162(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. This judgment reinforces the importance of the right to life under Article 21 and the need for timely medical care for accident victims. There is no change in the previous positions of law, but the judgment emphasizes the need for the effective implementation of existing legal provisions.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s judgment in S. Rajaseekaran vs. Union of India is a significant step towards ensuring that road accident victims receive timely medical care during the crucial golden hour. By directing the Central Government to implement the cashless treatment scheme by 14th March 2025, the Court has reaffirmed the importance of the right to life and the statutory obligations of the government. The judgment also highlights the need for effective implementation of existing legal provisions to save lives and provide necessary medical assistance to accident victims.
Category
Parent Category: Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Child Categories:
- Section 162, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
- Section 164-B, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
- Road Accident Victims
- Cashless Treatment
- Golden Hour
- Right to Life
- Public Interest Litigation
FAQ
Q: What is the “golden hour” in the context of road accidents?
A: The “golden hour” is the one-hour period immediately following a traumatic injury, during which prompt medical care is most likely to prevent death.
Q: What is the main issue addressed in this Supreme Court judgment?
A: The main issue is the lack of implementation of a cashless treatment scheme for road accident victims during the golden hour, as mandated by Section 162 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Q: What did the Supreme Court direct the Central Government to do?
A: The Supreme Court directed the Central Government to frame and implement a scheme for cashless treatment of road accident victims during the golden hour by 14th March 2025.
Q: What is the Motor Vehicle Accident Fund?
A: The Motor Vehicle Accident Fund, established under Section 164-B of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is a fund to provide compulsory insurance cover to all road users and is used for the treatment of persons injured in road accidents.
Q: What did the Supreme Court direct the General Insurance Council (GIC) to do?
A: The Supreme Court directed the GIC to process claims under the hit-and-run scheme based on seven specified documents and to complete the work of setting up a portal for uploading documents by 14th March 2025.
Q: What is the significance of this judgment?
A: This judgment is significant because it underscores the importance of timely medical care for road accident victims and the statutory obligation of the Central Government to implement the cashless treatment scheme. It emphasizes the protection of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.