Judgment 1. Even drinking water (H2O) is scarce in most parts of our country but the other water (Alcohol) flows aplenty in every nook and corner of the nation in which many families are drowning. Liquor is a poison to the society. Liquor is the basic reason for many social evils. In spite of that, the Governments are opening liquor shops/bars as many as possible with sole aim of getting revenue. In Tamil Nadu about 6850 TASMAC outlets are serving the needy people earning about Rs.30,000/- crores. 2. Two precious lives were lost in this case due to alleged drunken driving. Every year, hundreds of people die because of drunken driving. Not only the rider but also the pillion rider and even innocent people are affected by the accidents caused by drunken driving which has become serious and dangerous menace. In 2013 drunken driving caused 20290 accidents killing 6463 people injuring 20,081 people. In Tamil Nadu 2764 accidents occurred due to alcohol causing death of 718 people and injuring 2957. The above accidents and loss of lives are man made, avoidable and preventable. 3. These civil miscellaneous appeals have been filed against the common judgment and decree passed in the motor accident claim petitions filed for the death of one B. Ramkumar and B. Arunkumar in the accident occurred on 19/20/2011 at 0.03 hours in MG Road at the junction of Adyar LB Road. It is stated that the deceased Ramkumar was riding the motor cycle and Arunkumar was seated as pillion rider going from East to West on MG Road at the junction of Adyar LB Road. The bus belonging to the Metropolitan Transport Corporation driven by its driver from South to North, in rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motor cycle resulting in death of the aforesaid two persons. Hence the claim petitions. 4. On the other hand, the Transport Corporation contends that the driver of the Transport Corporation was driving the bus very carefully and when the bus crossed Adyar Signal, a motor cycle, at a greater speed came from a small lane and without noticing the Transport Corporation Bus, entered the main road and hit on the right side body of the bus voluntarily and both the riders sustained fatal injuries. Therefore, there was no negligence on the part of the Metropolitan Transport Corporation Driver. Therefore, there was no negligence on the part of the Metropolitan Transport Corporation Driver. It is also contended that the deceased B. Arunkumar and B. Ramkumar had been travelling in the motor cycle after fully drunk and lost their complete control of riding skill of motor cycle and thereby invited the accident. 5. After contest, the Tribunal found that Ramkumar who was riding the two wheeler, was found drunk as per the Postmortem Certificate which revealed the presence of smell of alcohol in the stomach of the deceased. Therefore, the Tribunal fixed 20% negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycles and 80% on the part of the driver of the bus and awarded a sum of Rs.9,25,720/-in favour of legal heirs of B. Arunkumar and Rs.11,34,067 in favour of the legal heirs of B. Ramkumar. Not satisfied with the compensation awarded, the dependents of the deceased Arunkumar as well as Ramkumar are before this Court. 6. Though the appeals are coming up for admission, the main issue is to be decided only at the time of final disposal of the appeals. The facts of the case make this court to go into the issue of drunken driving in detail, as more accidents occur due to drunken driving resulting in more deaths. 7. If we make an attempt to find out the root-cause for this kind of accidents, one can easily find the reason as liquor and “drunken driving”. It is an endeavour of this Court to find out a solution to this vexatious problem and to save many lives and families from the evil of drinking. Therefore, it is required to be gone into in detail, as drunken driving is the cause of action for this case. Moreover, this court cannot mechanically decide the matter based on the facts, when social issue or the common issue arises out of the case and this court is duty bound to decide not only the issue in the case before the Court, but also to pass orders effectively to prevent such cases in future. Moreover, this court cannot mechanically decide the matter based on the facts, when social issue or the common issue arises out of the case and this court is duty bound to decide not only the issue in the case before the Court, but also to pass orders effectively to prevent such cases in future. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others vs. Reddappa and another reported in 1993 4 SCC 269 has held that once the court is satisfied of injustice or arbitrariness, then the restriction, self-imposed or statutory stands removed and no rule or technicality or restraint of power can stand in the way of rendering justice. 8. Number of vehicles for the past 10 years got increased from 62,09,037 as on 1.4.2003 to 1,82,86,774 as on 1.1.2014 in Tamil Nadu. In the last three years Tamil Nadu has recorded an increasing number of road fatalities caused by drunk drivers. Tamil Nadu recorded fifth highest number of cases in 2011 and reached third place in this year as per data provided by Union Ministry, Road Transport and Highways. In 2013, 718 people were killed by drunk drivers in Tamilnadu which is more than 200 in 2011. Tamil Nadu topped in road accident because of poor enforcement of law. The following statistics proves the increase in drunken driving in Chennai City alone: CHENNAI TRAFFIC DRUNKEN DRIVING– MOTOR VEHICLE CASES DETAIL FROM 2002 to 2012 Year No. of cases booked Fine amount collected 2002 6042 1548770 2003 4482 1150800 2004 5247 974050 2005 5871 409995 2006 3360 690180 2007 6971 3682550 2008 11415 7415960 2009 12917 6791360 2010 12335 8491200 2011 16538 3519900 2012 upto 30.06.2012 10187 312750 Total 95365 34987515 ACTION AGAINST THE DRUNK DRIVERS IN TAMILNADU Year Driving Licence suspended Driving Licence cancelled 2010-11 3564 238 2011-12 3211 275 2012-13 2497 297 2013-14 12,657 1568 9. There are more chances for the people to consume alcohol in view of availability of liquor very easily in liquor shops and bars throughout India, except in Gujarat to drive the vehicles. When the Governments themselves open up liquor shops and simultaneously have established bars to allow the people to consume liquor, such course paves way for drunken driving causing more accidents resulting in loss of lives, disablement of many human beings, damage to the properties etc., attracting various Sections. When the Governments themselves open up liquor shops and simultaneously have established bars to allow the people to consume liquor, such course paves way for drunken driving causing more accidents resulting in loss of lives, disablement of many human beings, damage to the properties etc., attracting various Sections. Drunken driving should attract following Sections depending upon the nature of accident. Section 184: (Driving dangerously) of M.V. Act Section 185 (Driving by a drunken person or by a person under the influence of drugs) M.V. Act. Section 304(A) (Causing death by negligence) Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) Section 325 (Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt) Section 336 (Act endangering life or personal safety of others) Section 337 (Causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others Section 338 (Causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) of I.P.C. Hence there has to be a solution for this recurring menace. 10. There is no bar for people to drink as long as prohibition is not there. People can buy liquor and consume in their houses. The problem arises, when people drive vehicles after consumption of alcohol endangering their own lives and lives of others. 70% of the road fatalities are caused by drunken driving as per the report viz. “Road Traffic Accidents (RTAs) Due to Drunken Driving Ind India – Challenges in Prevention” submitted by two experts in “International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT) 2249-9563 Vol.2, No.4, August, 2012. Ä relevant portion of the said report is extracted as follows: “Drunken driving has been recognized as a world menace, based on the states which reveal that road accidents cause 12 lakh deaths and 500 lakh injuries around the world each year. Some 4,80,000 of these deaths and 200 lakh of people get injured by drunken driving. In a report for WHO, a multi-centre collaborative study – 'Injury and Alcohol' at National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences (NIMHANS) Bangalore it was found that the proportion of injuries 'linked” alcohol use was 58.9% of all injuries with 24% due to own drinking and 35% due to others drinking. It was found that on the types of injuries amongst alcohol users, 46% was due to road accidents. It was found that on the types of injuries amongst alcohol users, 46% was due to road accidents. A study from Kerala State conducted by the Alcohol & Drug Information Centre revealed around 40% of the road accidents have occurred because the driver was under the Influence of alcohol. In the case of accidents on National Highways, more than 72% were related drinks driving. In a survey done at Delhi by the Directorate of Prohibition, it was found that 45% of vehicles are driven by drivers who had consumed alcoholic drinks. Car owners who attend dinners/parties tend to get drunk, indulge in rash driving and are unable to control the vehicle and meed with accidents. About 60% and 65% of accidents are being caused by drunken drivers of cars and two wheelers during the night and early hours of the morning.” The above details would only prove that there is a close connection between the drunken driving and road accidents. To put it in other words, increase in drunken driving proportionately increases the number of accidents and there is a proximity/close connection between these two. In those circumstances, not only the rulers, bureaucrats and law enforcing agencies and all other stake holders have to take appropriate measures to prevent drinking and drunken driving. 11. Framers of our Constitution included prohibition in one of the directive principles of State policy and the relevant Article 47 reads as follows: “47. Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.” Therefore it is the bounden duty of the Governments to eradicate the evil of drinking by total prohibition which will be in the interest of the citizens, families and consequently, the society. After all the father of our nation was against liquor and he said “Drugs and Drink are the two arms of the devil with which he strikes his helpless slaves into stupefaction and intoxication”. There are many dangerous consequences of drinking including commission of many crimes. After all the father of our nation was against liquor and he said “Drugs and Drink are the two arms of the devil with which he strikes his helpless slaves into stupefaction and intoxication”. There are many dangerous consequences of drinking including commission of many crimes. Drunken driving is on such evil consequence. 12. Many families are shattered because of drinking. Health, wealth, peace of mind are lost due to alcohol, and mostly sufferers are women and children and they are affected physically, physiologically, economically. More people including juveniles are increasingly becoming addicts. It has become very dangerous problem and it should be fought jointly by policy makers, bureaucrats, Non-governmental organizations, political parties and people involving Women. New methods have to be found out to deter the people from taking liquor. It is also reported that juveniles are taking liquor and becoming addicts. It is alleged that some of the Government servants are coming to the office after consuming liquor and thereby government functions are stated to be affected. 13. Mostly the accidents caused due to drunken driving cases are not correctly filed or under reported or unreported for the purpose of getting compensation by the victims or their LRs. That is the reason why the correct and actual details regarding drunken driving are not available. If actual details are available, it would be shocking. The increase in the accidents in India may have connection with increase in liquor bars/shops. 14) In view of the above, it is appropriate to implead 1) Union of India represented by its Cabinet Secretary, New Delhi; 2) State of Tamilnadu represented by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 002 3) The Managing Director, TASMAC, Egmore, Chennai, 4) The Director General of Police, DIG's Office, Mylapore. Chennai, and accordingly, they are suo motu impleaded as respondents 2 to 4 in the above appeals. 15. The following queries are required to be answered by the newly impleaded respondents: (a) How can the States open Liquor shops/Bars resulting in drunken driving by the consumers of liquor, when Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act prohibits driving by drunken person or the person under the influence of drugs? (b) Is the policy decision to allow liquor shops/bars not violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India (protection of life and personal liberty) and the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act 1988? (b) Is the policy decision to allow liquor shops/bars not violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India (protection of life and personal liberty) and the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act 1988? (c) Whether, in the opinion of the Governments, the alcohol money derived from Liquor Shops outweighs the right to protection of life enshrined in the Constitution of India? (d) Why have the respective Governments (Central & States) not considered implementation of total prohibition in consonance with Article 47 of the Constitution to protect the people from the evils of liquor? (e) Why have not the Government found out alternate source of revenue to promulgate prohibition? (f) Whether data with regard to alcohol induced crimes/offences committed including drunken driving are periodically collected and documented for the purpose of strategy management? (g) Is it not necessary to teach the children about the evils of alcohol in schools as juveniles are also stated to be taking liquor and becoming addicts? (h) Why not the Governments and their instrumentalities check their servants to verify consumption of alcohol at the time of reporting to duty and if found positive, not to allow for the duty and initiate departmental proceedings, as it is alleged some of them are stated to be reporting duty under the influence of alcohol? (i) Why not the Government through effective methods, including publicity campaign by roping in celebrities to discourage consumption of alcohol and drunken driving? (j) Why not Government establish more counsellings centers in every talk as more and more people are becoming addicts to liquor? (k) Why not the Governments atleast close down the bars at least to prevent accidents and loss of lives due to drunken driving, which are increasing every year as there is close connection and proximity between drunken driving and accidents? (l) Why not the Central Government amend the law to make drunken driving as non-bailable offence as dangerous consequences including fatalities are inevitable? (m) Why not the law enforcing agencies regularly check drunken driving in all the roads more particularly in the Highways every day to prevent accidents? (n) Why not the Government establish mobile labs and mobile Courts in the highways to check drunken driving regularly and try those cases speedily and convict the offenders? (m) Why not the law enforcing agencies regularly check drunken driving in all the roads more particularly in the Highways every day to prevent accidents? (n) Why not the Government establish mobile labs and mobile Courts in the highways to check drunken driving regularly and try those cases speedily and convict the offenders? (o) Why not the police arrest drunk drivers for the offence under Section 185 of the M.V. Act under Section 202 of Act, instead of fining? (p) Why not, as an interim measure restrict liquor shops/bar timing from 12 hours (10.00 A.M. To 10.00 P.M.) to 8 hours ( 12.00 A.M. To 8.00 P.M.)? 16. Mr. G. Rajagopal Additional Solicitor General takes notice on behalf of the newly 2nd respondent, Mr. Danapalan A.G.P. Takes notice on behalf of RR 3 and 4 and Mr. Muthurajan takes notice on behalf of 5th respondent and they are required to get response by 11thDecember 2014. Mr. S. Sivakumar takes notice on behalf of first respondent. 17. Post the case on 11.12.2014. Meanwhile call for the records.