The Supreme Court, hearing the Phalodi highway accident case, strongly questioned NHAI over safety failures, fog-related risks, and illegal roadside dhabas. The Court stressed accountability and examined whether NHAI can shift responsibility to local authorities.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday heard a suo moto case concerning a highway accident in Phalodi, Rajasthan, raising serious questions about road safety, fog-related accidents, and the statutory responsibilities of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).
A bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi examined the issue, particularly focusing on whether NHAI can shift responsibility to contractors, police, and local administration, or whether it has independent powers under the law to ensure highway safety.
Appearing for NHAI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the Court that an affidavit had already been filed. However, the bench sought deeper clarity.
Justice Maheshwari directly questioned NHAI’s role, stating:
“Mr. SG, please clarify the powers of NHAI. Currently, you are attributing responsibility to contractors, police, and local administration, citing correspondence. We want to know what powers NHAI actually has under the Act and Rules. Can everything be left to administrative authorities?”
In response, the Solicitor General said:
“Let me study the statutory framework; it is an issue.”
Justice Vijay Bishnoi highlighted seasonal risks, especially winter fog, observing:
“Especially now during winter with heavy fog.”
Addressing safety measures, SG Mehta stated that enforcement mechanisms were in place:
“Speed limits are enforced, and we have cameras installed.”
He also clarified that side roads provided for vehicle breakdowns were being misused:
“There are specific side roads for vehicles with breakdowns. These side roads are not meant for dhabas.”
On the issue of roadside dhabas contributing to highway hazards, Mehta acknowledged that NHAI does have removal powers:
“Removal of dhabas is within NHAI’s power, but there is a general delegation to district magistrates who control police authorities.”
He added that NHAI frequently requests district administrations to take action, but admitted:
“We keep requesting them to remove dhabas, but a more effective solution is needed.”
Justice Maheshwari emphasized the need for accountability and clarity, directing NHAI to file a comprehensive reply covering three key aspects:
“Your reply should cover three things — the provisions of the Act, Rules, and Regulations that empower action; actions taken and how they align with these provisions; and identification of those responsible for non-compliance.”
Supreme Court Order
In its order, the Supreme Court suggested the filing of three separate compilations:
- Statutory framework – provisions of the Act, Rules, Regulations, and Guidelines
- Violations – instances where guidelines were breached
- Responsibility matrix – identification of officials and private individuals responsible for non-compliance
The Court noted that after discussions between the Amicus Curiae and the Solicitor General, several issues had been resolved that may help in framing future road safety guidelines.
In a practical step, the Court also permitted parties to exchange Google images to better understand ground realities and address the root causes of highway accidents.
Case Title:
IN RE: PHALODI ACCIDENT V NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA
SMW(C) No. 9/2025
READ LIVE COVERAGE
READ ORDER
Click Here to Read More Reports on Phalodi Accident
