SBI Term Loan: RLLR: 8.15 | 7.25% - 8.45%
Canara Bank: RLLR: 8 | 7.15% - 10%
ICICI Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.5% - 9.65%
Punjab & Sind Bank: RLLR: 7.3 | 7.3% - 10.7%
Bank of Baroda: RLLR: 7.9 | 7.2% - 8.95%
Federal Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.75% - 10%
IndusInd Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.5% - 9.75%
Bank of Maharashtra: RLLR: 8.05 | 7.1% - 9.15%
Yes Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.4% - 10.54%
Karur Vysya Bank: RLLR: 8.8 | 8.5% - 10.65%

Supreme Court says road safety is part of right to life, issues highway safety directions

#Law & Policy#Infrastructure#India
Last Updated : 23rd Apr, 2026
Synopsis

The Supreme Court has ruled that safe road travel is a part of the right to life under Article 21, stressing that authorities must ensure safer highways and expressways. While hearing a suo motu case linked to serious road accidents, the Court issued nationwide directions aimed at reducing preventable deaths. It highlighted that highways carry a high share of fatalities despite forming a small part of the road network. The Court also ordered stricter enforcement against illegal parking, encroachments, and poor monitoring systems across states.

The Supreme Court has stated that safe movement on roads forms an essential part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. It underlined that the State has a direct responsibility to ensure road users are protected through proper infrastructure, regulation, and enforcement.


The order came while the Court was examining a suo motu matter related to a series of major road accidents reported across different states, which resulted in multiple deaths and injuries. The bench noted that a significant number of such incidents are preventable and largely occur due to weak enforcement, unsafe road conditions, and lack of coordination among authorities.

The Court observed that national highways, though forming a limited portion of the total road network, account for a disproportionately high number of fatalities. It stressed that such outcomes cannot be accepted as normal and reflect gaps in governance and safety planning. It also clarified that administrative delays or resource limitations cannot be used as justification for failing to protect human life.

As part of its directions, the Court prohibited parking of heavy and commercial vehicles on highway carriageways and paved shoulders, except at officially designated parking areas. It also directed authorities to remove illegal encroachments along highways, including unauthorised structures and roadside setups that obstruct traffic movement or create safety risks.

The Court further instructed the use of technology-based monitoring systems, including real-time traffic alerts, GPS tracking for transport vehicles, automated challan systems, and stronger surveillance mechanisms to improve compliance and reduce violations. It emphasised that enforcement must be consistent and not limited to selective action.

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, National Highways Authority of India, State Police forces, Transport Departments, and district administrations have been asked to coordinate closely for implementation. They have also been directed to prepare standard operating procedures for regular inspections, patrolling, and safety audits on highways.

The Court additionally highlighted the need to identify accident-prone blackspots and take corrective measures without delay. It noted that expressways and highways must be maintained as safe corridors, and any lapse in regulation or infrastructure planning increases the risk of avoidable accidents.

Have something to say? Post your comment