NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday sharply criticised the central government for the delay in rolling out a scheme for the cashless treatment of victims of the accident during the golden hour, and ordered the ministry of road, transport and highways ministry (MoRTH) to notify the scheme by May 9.
“Are you really concerned about welfare of common man? How can you be so casual that for three years, you have no policy and people are dying on roads without getting treatment in the golden hour,” a bench of justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan told the central government.
The top court’s sharp criticism came during a hearing on a public interest litigation that complained the government was yet to notify the scheme promised in Section 162 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act that came into force on April 1, 2022.
According to Section 162 (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.”
The court has directed that the government come up with a second scheme to provide interim relief to road accident victims when the case comes before the Motor Accident Tribunal. This amount, to be fixed by a scheme framed under section 164A of the MV Act, was directed to be finalised within four months rather than have proceedings continue endlessly for years.
The two provisions – sections 162(2) and 164A – came into force from April 1, 2022 but were not implemented due to the absence of an accompanying scheme. Advocate Kishan Chand Jain approached the court to take up the matter, and sought assistance from senior advocate Gaurav Agarwal in identifying the gaps causing the delay.
On Monday, MoRTH secretary V Umashankar appeared virtually before the court and informed the bench that the scheme has been finalised but due to certain “roadblocks” caused by the General Insurance Council (GIC) – an apex body of all insurance companies – the same could not be rolled out.
GIC moved an application flagging challenges in rolling out the scheme which the court refused to entertain following which GIC withdrew it. Umashankar apologised to the court for the delay on part of the Centre and said that with minor tweaks, the draft scheme will be forwarded to the law department and the same will be notified within a week.
Granting the Centre one week’s time to come out with the scheme on cashless treatment, the bench said, “What is the use of constructing so many highways when there is no scheme to help those who are dying there? How many more people have to die before this scheme gets operational.”
The court directed a copy of the notified scheme to be placed before the court by May 9 along with a compliance report to be considered on the next date of hearing on May 13.
Agarwal informed the court that for accidents involving insured vehicles, the conflict seems to arise over who would make the payment since GIC insisted that it would pay the hospital while the Centre insisted that the payment should be from its end. Even on the quantum, the Centre informed the court that the cap on treatment cost will be ₹1.5 lakh up to a maximum of seven days in hospital.
Jain’s application suggested that this amount may not be enough as a situation may arise where the treatment cost may be exhausted and the patient is left to pay hospital bills.
The court told the secretary, “What is the use of having such beneficial legislations if they are not to be implemented. You are not bothered about implementing your own statutes or the orders of this court.”
On January 8 this year, the top court issued directions to the Centre to make the scheme operational and further directed GIC to set up a portal by March 14 for expeditious processing of compensation claims for hit and run accident victims.
The court dealt with another application filed by Jain on interim relief to road accident victims. The bench said, “Such an important provision has remained unimplemented for three years. This failure has to be deprecated.”
The court granted the Centre four months to frame the scheme.
Agarwal informed the court that section 164A, prior to the amendment in 2022, allowed motor accident claims tribunal (MACT) to disburse a small sum of ₹15,000 to the victims with a view to help widows pay the home rent and children’s school fees to be paid after the lone earning member dies in a road accident. Under the present scheme, MACT is unable to disburse any amount as the scheme is yet to be notified.