'Add it to electricity bill': Supreme Court's new suggestion to tackle crores of unpaid traffic challans
The apex court was told that ₹45,000 crore worth of e-challan fines were to be recovered across India—of which only ₹25,000 crore had been recovered so far
The apex court was told that ₹45,000 crore worth of e-challan fines were to be recovered across India—of which only ₹25,000 crore had been recovered so far.
The apex court was told that ₹45,000 crore worth of e-challan fines were to be recovered across India—of which only ₹25,000 crore had been recovered so far.
The apex court was told that ₹45,000 crore worth of e-challan fines were to be recovered across India—of which only ₹25,000 crore had been recovered so far.
The Supreme Court on Monday suggested that unpaid traffic e-challans be linked to electricity bills, as ₹20,000 crore of these fines are yet to be recovered by authorities in various states and union territories (UTs).
The suggestion was made on Monday by a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, who had been hearing a plea about the electronic enforcement of traffic violations and the recovery of unpaid e-challan fines.
When the apex court was informed that ₹45,000 crore worth of e-challan fines were to be recovered across India—of which only ₹25,000 crore had been recovered so far—Justice Pardiwala held that the authorities needed to focus on recovering the fines, rather than simply issuing "thousands and lakhs of such e-challans", as per a Bar and Bench report.
“If people are not paying traffic challans, add it to their electricity dues bill. They’ll have to pay electricity bills else power line will be disconnected. Work it out. In this country, you have to find a way out,” the bench added, in order to push people towards clearing their traffic fines.
Other measures suggested by the Supreme Court included licence suspension, blacklisting vehicles linked to such challans on the Parivahan portal and blocks on documents—such as the renewal of registration certificates; the issuance of fitness, Pollution Under Control (PUC), or duplicate certificates; and changes in ownership.
“Let there be random checking of vehicles and if found that e-challan has not been honoured, necessary steps to be taken to impound the vehicle itself,” the bench added, pointing out that such measures needed to work on the ground level.
The Monday plea in the Supreme Court sought directions for mechanisms to enforce unpaid traffic fines under Section 136A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with Rule 167A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.
The application was heard as part of a long-running public interest litigation (PIL) petition on road safety filed in 2012 by Coimbatore-based orthopaedic surgeon S Rajaseekaran, the report added.
The petition seeks coordinated measures to reduce road accidents, improve infrastructure, and make post-accident care more effective and timely.
"If all these directions are going to remain on paper and are not going to be implemented by the authorities, then one fine day we may have to take some stern action which may not be liked by the authorities,” the SC remarked on the PIL itself.
It has now asked the amicus curiae, Senior Advocate Gaurav Agarwal, to prepare a chart outlining how its rulings in the broader case have been implemented so far.