Law Commision of India's Report on Legal Reforms to combat Road Accidents

[jayadev]

yet again we are entangling ourselves into calculative logics and assumptions.
just take it in this way.
which could be more dangerous, a heavily loaded truck at 40kmph or a car at 70kmph?
if a thorough thought be given for above then many things could be solved.

i have heard umpteen times almost everybody relating accident with over speed.police and officials easily dismiss a case stating it was due to over speed.

nearby my home a whole family was killed by bus which was at 30-40 kmph when leaf broke and ran over the family waiting for the same bus.

there are lot of auto rickshaw accident happening ,not long ago an auto was crushed to junk metals killing 3 women and driver ,by an oil tanker . neither of them was above 40kmph. as per witness the auto-wallah did something very funny..!!

if we all keep thinking that it is just overspeed or alchohol which is main cause of road accidents and death then we have a long way to learn.

i agree at high speed chances of accidents are more but rather than cut speed and be slouches we should have a progressive approach .at least i feel ashamed to drive at crawling speed on good highways till eternity while same distance in abroad we save lot of time as well as fuel.

full fledged advertisement on media about certain rules being strengthened and braking them would be highly punishable and law start acting from there.
accident causing tactics and personalities should be eliminated from root.
say for example. it should not be restricted to mere 70kmph over speeding and wearing seat belts.

i wonder how unfair it is that all pvt car drivers are bieng caught and fined for no seatbelt . but remaining vehicals ,bus,trucks,auto rickshaws ,jeeps et al are excepmted, they dont even have proper doors.(strange,kerala state transport buses dont have doors-how unsafe)

 

[drifter]

yet again we are entangling ourselves into calculative logics and assumptions.
just take it in this way.
which could be more dangerous, a heavily loaded truck at 40kmph or a car at 70kmph?
if a thorough thought be given for above then many things could be solved.

i have heard umpteen times almost everybody relating accident with over speed.police and officials easily dismiss a case stating it was due to over speed.

nearby my home a whole family was killed by bus which was at 30-40 kmph when leaf broke and ran over the family waiting for the same bus.

there are lot of auto rickshaw accident happening ,not long ago an auto was crushed to junk metals killing 3 women and driver ,by an oil tanker . neither of them was above 40kmph. as per witness the auto-wallah did something very funny..!!

if we all keep thinking that it is just overspeed or alchohol which is main cause of road accidents and death then we have a long way to learn.

i agree at high speed chances of accidents are more but rather than cut speed and be slouches we should have a progressive approach .at least i feel ashamed to drive at crawling speed on good highways till eternity while same distance in abroad we save lot of time as well as fuel.

full fledged advertisement on media about certain rules being strengthened and braking them would be highly punishable and law start acting from there.
accident causing tactics and personalities should be eliminated from root.
say for example. it should not be restricted to mere 70kmph over speeding and wearing seat belts.

i wonder how unfair it is that all pvt car drivers are bieng caught and fined for no seatbelt . but remaining vehicals ,bus,trucks,auto rickshaws ,jeeps et al are excepmted, they dont even have proper doors.(strange,kerala state transport buses dont have doors-how unsafe)

Speed kills - yes it is true. But no speed = standing still does not kill instantly. We just would starve to death. Sounds funny? It isn't.

You are right. It is less speed related than driving without due care and attention that people die.

Regarding drunk driving I can't see the logic behind different fines for different levels of alcohol in the blood. Whoever suggest this is a moron.

Don't get me wrong, I do drink beer and sometimes wine, but when I am driving I make sure that I am not under the influence of alcohol. Not that I would gert drunk, but on different days one might react to alcohol differently. People who take the liberty to take the risk playing with other peoples life by carelessness should not be allowed to have a license.

Driving on an expressway at speed on stretches that are clear should be no problem. There is no carelessness about.

Driving 50kph or even slower on the express way and changing lanes without due care or attention is as bad as driving drunk as it is the same sort of uncontrolled driving.

Trucks (and cars too) overtaking by just ignoring anyone else should be treated with the same sort of behaviour = we do not care whether you lose your life too.

Driving a vehicle that is not roadworthy or a risk to other motorist or pedestrians should also be punished with severe sentence and not just a fine.

Authorities not enforcing it should be sentenced by independent tribunals with prison and in sever cases (where fatalities occurred) the death penalty should be considered.

The Law Commission talks a lot for the money they get paid, but does not provide any assistance to the motorists where the real need is.

When analysing the causes of road injury and fatalities it will soon become clear that every accident is caused by excessive speed under the particular circumstances. But this excessive speed is in most cases not exceeding the set speed limits. As long as we do not differentiate between the two, we can't bring any measures in to lower the accident rate other than reducing the speed limits to absurd levels.

Education is certainly one part of improving the situation, but a harsh penalty system is much more needed.

 

[jayadev]

Do you think a 1000 people's convenience should hamper the convenience and well being of 33387677? (Thats the number of people in Kerala as in accordance to the 2011 census figures.)

i dont know the statistical figure but most of us (i am from rural part of kannur.)
from my panchayat maybe around 20000 persons rely on short distance. rarely anybody travel longer than 20km per day.
50 percent would be females mostly housewives
20percent must be students and kids
5-10 percent may be abroad
10 percent must be labourer
10 percent govt servant etc.etc.
for long journeys we always prefer railways .why?, because they are cheaper,comfortable and reliable.
otherwise local bus and bikes

then whom does rely on roads or express highways?
mostly trucks, long distance buses and car whom have to travel interstate or inter district.
but local people wont be frequent long distance commuters. so how much benefit can we expect would it be worth having a express highway through kerala?

 

[jalex]

yet again we are entangling ourselves into calculative logics and assumptions.
just take it in this way.
which could be more dangerous, a heavily loaded truck at 40kmph or a car at 70kmph?
if a thorough thought be given for above then many things could be solved.

i have heard umpteen times almost everybody relating accident with over speed.police and officials easily dismiss a case stating it was due to over speed.

nearby my home a whole family was killed by bus which was at 30-40 kmph when leaf broke and ran over the family waiting for the same bus.

there are lot of auto rickshaw accident happening ,not long ago an auto was crushed to junk metals killing 3 women and driver ,by an oil tanker . neither of them was above 40kmph. as per witness the auto-wallah did something very funny..!!

if we all keep thinking that it is just overspeed or alchohol which is main cause of road accidents and death then we have a long way to learn.

i agree at high speed chances of accidents are more but rather than cut speed and be slouches we should have a progressive approach .at least i feel ashamed to drive at crawling speed on good highways till eternity while same distance in abroad we save lot of time as well as fuel.

full fledged advertisement on media about certain rules being strengthened and braking them would be highly punishable and law start acting from there.
accident causing tactics and personalities should be eliminated from root.
say for example. it should not be restricted to mere 70kmph over speeding and wearing seat belts.

i wonder how unfair it is that all pvt car drivers are bieng caught and fined for no seatbelt . but remaining vehicals ,bus,trucks,auto rickshaws ,jeeps et al are excepmted, they dont even have proper doors.(strange,kerala state transport buses dont have doors-how unsafe)

It does not make us car and bike users justified by pointing fingers at some other traffic offenders being let loose. What I advocate, is that all sorts of violators should be dealt with. And enforcement should be without looking at faces.

Speed kills - yes it is true. But no speed = standing still does not kill instantly. We just would starve to death. Sounds funny? It isn't.

You are right. It is less speed related than driving without due care and attention that people die.

Regarding drunk driving I can't see the logic behind different fines for different levels of alcohol in the blood. Whoever suggest this is a moron.

Don't get me wrong, I do drink beer and sometimes wine, but when I am driving I make sure that I am not under the influence of alcohol. Not that I would gert drunk, but on different days one might react to alcohol differently. People who take the liberty to take the risk playing with other peoples life by carelessness should not be allowed to have a license.

Driving on an expressway at speed on stretches that are clear should be no problem. There is no carelessness about.

Driving 50kph or even slower on the express way and changing lanes without due care or attention is as bad as driving drunk as it is the same sort of uncontrolled driving.

Trucks (and cars too) overtaking by just ignoring anyone else should be treated with the same sort of behaviour = we do not care whether you lose your life too.

Driving a vehicle that is not roadworthy or a risk to other motorist or pedestrians should also be punished with severe sentence and not just a fine.

Authorities not enforcing it should be sentenced by independent tribunals with prison and in sever cases (where fatalities occurred) the death penalty should be considered.

The Law Commission talks a lot for the money they get paid, but does not provide any assistance to the motorists where the real need is.

When analysing the causes of road injury and fatalities it will soon become clear that every accident is caused by excessive speed under the particular circumstances. But this excessive speed is in most cases not exceeding the set speed limits. As long as we do not differentiate between the two, we can't bring any measures in to lower the accident rate other than reducing the speed limits to absurd levels.

Education is certainly one part of improving the situation, but a harsh penalty system is much more needed.

When someone is drunk and just a little, He slows down a bit but can talk without any problem and has ample motor ability if not great. When he drinks some more, His tongue starts to act sloppy and he can't pronounce certain words. And its not just his talking, But he can't function normally. (Just today I saw a video of a lady who was flagged down telling the cops after getting tanked up with alcohol." My brother is also a Police car like you"!) This sloppiness increases with the level of intoxication. And the reaction times get hampered and is on an ascending level with the ascending level of the alcohol he's had.

When the punishment for penal crimes go up with its seriousness and damage toll, Then its okay in my view to increase the amount of fine with the increase in the level alcohol in the blood stream of a person while driving. I strongly vote for compulsory imprisonment as well in addition in all cases and may start with 3 days imprisonment.

And agree with you on harsher punishment. I've heard many accused say to us lawyers, that money is not an issue for them, But they should not get imprisonment.

And I did not understand the part where you said "The Law Commission talks a lot for the money they get paid". Could you put in a little more detail?

 

[jayadev]

When analysing the causes of road injury and fatalities it will soon become clear that every accident is caused by excessive speed under the particular circumstances. But this excessive speed is in most cases not exceeding the set speed limits. As long as we do not differentiate between the two, we can't bring any measures in to lower the accident rate other than reducing the speed limits to absurd levels.
Education is certainly one part of improving the situation, but a harsh penalty system is much more needed.

just a while ago on highway 3km from my home one bus has gone offroad falling into a shallow canal .hurting 36 person onboard not very serious though.
couldnt take the pics because it has got dark.
the reason passengers and driver said was the biker coming from opposite almost hitting the bus ." in such heavy rain visibility is next to nothing and the biker with his overcoat and helmet..only god know what he was thinking to come over my chest" (helmetum coatum ittondu e pemarikku ente nenchathekku keri varaan engineya thoniyathu)that is what driver said in tears..the biker flew away.

to me it make sense to punish bikers driving in rain which could be more dangerous than driving in mild influence of alchohol.

but do we have any provision in law for riding two wheeler in rain??

 

[jalex]

i dont know the statistical figure but most of us (i am from rural part of kannur.)
from my panchayat maybe around 20000 persons rely on short distance. rarely anybody travel longer than 20km per day.
50 percent would be females mostly housewives
20percent must be students and kids
5-10 percent may be abroad
10 percent must be labourer
10 percent govt servant etc.etc.
for long journeys we always prefer railways .why?, because they are cheaper,comfortable and reliable.
otherwise local bus and bikes

then whom does rely on roads or express highways?
mostly trucks, long distance buses and car whom have to travel interstate or inter district.
but local people wont be frequent long distance commuters. so how much benefit can we expect would it be worth having a express highway through kerala?

You are forgetting the fact that we are the number one consumer state, Everything comes from other states. And we in Idukki District dont even have a railway line.

And more about expressways. Earlier in 2001, I used to use the highways to Bengaluru. It took a lot of time, a lot of braking- stop and go. Had to go through many towns and it took 12-13 hours to reach destination if there were no blocks. Now the Highways have become like expressways and have tolls, But when I look at the time saved(Can get there in a relaxed 8-9 hours)and the fuel saved plus almost no stress and strain, Its worth every penny I pay at the toll. In fact I save on wear and tear. In 2005 I got a whopping 26.7 kmpl for my 800 while doing the same route, The car had done 1,37,000Kms on the clock then.

What I am trying to say is that people get more choices. See someone takes an hour and travels 25kms in jammed traffic for going to work. The distance he can go for work is limited to that. (I believe that a maximum of two hour commute either ways, every day is best for a person to work efficiently.) If someone can go 60kms one way to work in an hour. He gets more opportunities for work. See our state was one which said computers will make people lose jobs so to hell with them. If we stayed that way. You and I would never have had this discussion.

I some days travel 100 Kms to appear in a court. When I reach there I'm already exhausted, Now its a lot better after the flyovers have been built on the NH47 and with multiple lanes. Why should people have to waste time and energy on the roads when they could do a lot of fruitful things instead of turning out to be on the receiving end or the giving ends of road rage. And yes road rage is becoming common everywhere, especially in Kerala. When someone takes 2 hours to do 40Kms, he starts to drive like crazy and becomes an addict to rage. Or else we should tax all private vehicles ludicrously and compel people to use public transport.

 

[jalex]

just a while ago on highway 3km from my home one bus has gone offroad falling into a shallow canal .hurting 36 person onboard not very serious though.
couldnt take the pics because it has got dark.
the reason passengers and driver said was the biker coming from opposite almost hitting the bus ." in such heavy rain visibility is next to nothing and the biker with his overcoat and helmet..only god know what he was thinking to come over my chest" (helmetum coatum ittondu e pemarikku ente nenchathekku keri varaan engineya thoniyathu)that is what driver said in tears..the biker flew away.

to me it make sense to punish bikers driving in rain which could be more dangerous than driving in mild influence of alchohol.

but do we have any provision in law for riding two wheeler in rain??

There is nothing to stop someone from riding a bike in rains, But in the case you mentioned. The reason it happened most probably would be that the biker was using a bad visor on his helmet, Then again, if it was dark and the bus was using headlights, the glare on his scratched visor would make him totally blind and he wouldn't know where he was going.

If at all there is a provision to make the biker accountable,

That would be Section 184. Driving dangerously. “Whoever drives a motor vehicle at a speed or in a manner which is dangerous to the public,
having regard to all the circumstances of the case including the
nature, condition and use of the place where the vehicle is driven
and the amount of traffic which actually is at the time or which
might reasonably be expected to be in the place, shall be
punishable for the first offence with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to
one thousand rupees, and for any second or subsequent offence, if
committed within three years of the commission of a previous
similar offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
two years, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees,
or with both.”

We could say he rode dangerously cause his visor was damaged blinding him and making him unable to see especially in the rains at dark. But this is would be difficult to be proven by prosecution at court. The defense side would say the bus came with high beams blinding the biker.