ABHAY SINGHversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

                        [2013) 17 S.C.R. 80


A                          ABHAY SINGH
                                 v.
           STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS
          (Special Leave Petition No.(C) No.25237/2010)
                       DECEMBER 10, 2013
B
             [G.S. SINGHVI AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.]

          Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - ss. 109, 110 and 111 - Motor
    Vehicle Rules, 1989 - Rules 108, 108A and 119 - Use of
C multi-toned horns and lights of red, blue, white and multi
    colour - On the motor vehicles - Permissibility - Held: To
    curb the menace of use of mu/ti-toned horns in violation of
   rule 119 by the people in power, holders of public offices, civil
   servants and ordinary citizens, exemplary fine needs to be
D imposed on the violators, and its rigorous enforcement needs ·
    to be ensured - The use of signs and symbols of authority
  · such as red lights etc. is contrary to the constitutional ethos
    and basic feature of republicanism - But the framers of the
    Constitution have considered it appropriate to treat those,
E occupying constitutional positions as a special category,
    there is no reason for the Court to exclude them from the ambit
    of the term "high dignitaries" - Hence, the term "high
    dignitaries" used in proviso (iii) to Rufe 108(1) would take
    within its fold various constitutional functionaries - The use
    of red lights on the vehicles carrying the holders of
F
    constitutional posts will not compromise with the dignity of
    other citizens and individuals because this distinction would
    be available to them only while on duty and would be co-
    terminus with their tenure - Various States and administration
    of Union Territories have failed to check the misuse of red
G lights on the vehicles - Notifications issued by them allowing
    the use of red lights is also far beyond the scope of clause
     'C' of Notifications dated 11-1-2002 and 28-7-2005 issued by
    the Central Government - States and Union Territories

H                                 80
    ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                     81


directed not to enlarge the scope of the term "high dignitaries"    A
beyond what is prescribed in clauses 'c' and 'd' of Notifications
dated 11.1.2002 and 28.7.2005 issued by the Central
Government - The men in uniform; operational agencies
which require un-hindered access to the roads for
performance of their duty; those engaged in emergency duties        B
such as ambulance services, fire services, emergency
maintenance etc, and police vehicles used as escorts or
pilots or for law and order duties shall not be entitled to have
red lights but lights of other colours, e.g., blue, white,
multicoloured etc. - No motor vehicles except those specified       c
in Rule 119(3) shall be fitted with multi-toned horns - The
police officers and other authorities entrusted with the task of
enforcing the provisions of the 1988 Act and the Rules framed
thereunder directed to discharge their duties without any fear
or favour and to impose appropriate penalty on those who            D
violate the prohibition contained in Rule 108(1) and Rule 119
and similar rules framed by the State Governments and the
Administration of Union Territories.
     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave
Petition(Civil) No. 25237 of 2010.                                  E
    From the Judgment and Order dated 21.08.2009 of the
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in CMWP No. 15440 of
1998.
     Mohan Parasaran, SG, Siddharth Luthra, ASG, Harish N.          F
Salve, Sushil Kumar Jain, Rakesh Dwivedi, A. Mariarputham,
Gaurav Bhatia, Reena Singh,.Ajay Bansal, Jasbir Singh Malik,
Shankar Chillarge, Manjit Singh, AAGs, Prashant Bhushan,
Farrukh Rasheed, B.K. Prasad, Alok Prasanna, A.K. Kaul, G.S.
Bedi, Supriya Juneja, D.S. Mahra, Ravi Prakash Mehrotra,            G
Abhinav Kr. Malik, Kuldip Singh, Gaurav Yadav, Asha Gopalan
Nair, Vinay Kuhar, Tarjit Singh, Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Prateek
Dwivedi, Aishverya Shandilya, Aruna Mathur, Shibashish Misra,
Suvinay Dash, K. Enatoli Serna, Amit Kr. Singh, Ranjan
Mukherjee, Subhro Sanyal, Gopal Pn:isad, Jay Gaurav,
                                                                    H
    82        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A Balasubramanian, K.V. Jagdishvaran, G. Indira, Suryanaryana
  Singh, Pragati Neekhra, V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotle, Prabu
  Ramasubramanian, Gunnam Venkateswara Rao, B. Balaji,
  Sapam Biswajit Meith, Khwairakpam Nobin Singh, P.V.
  Yogeswaran, Gopal Singh, V.N. Raghuµathy, Balaji, Srinivasan,
B Sunil Fernandes, Hemantika Wahi, B.V. Balaram Das, Mishra
  Saurabh, Sunil Kumar jain, Sachin Sharma, Anuradha Mutatkar,
  Anil Shrivasatav, Rituraj Biswas, Soummitra G. Chaudhuri, Anip
  Sachthey, Shagun Matta, Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Dharmendra
  Kumar Sinha, T. Mahipal, Shreekant N. Terdal, C.D. Singh for
c the Appearing Parties.
         The Order of the Court wad delivered by
         ORDER
        G.S. SINGHVI, J. 1. One of the several questions of public
D and constitutional importance raised by Shri Harish Salve,
  learned senior counsel, who initially appeared on behalf of the··
  petitioner in the special leave petitions filed against order dated
  21.8.2009 passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High
  Court in C.M.W.P. No. 15440of1998 quashing the withdrawal
E of "Z Grade Security" provided to Respondent No.6-Pramod
  Tiwari, but later on assumed the role of an Amicus, is whether
  the Constitution contemplates categorization of citizens into two
  groups and whether the entitlement to use signs and symbols
  of authority, such as lights of different colours including red lights,
F insignia, and convoys/escorts by public servants and persons,
  who hold public offices under the States or the Union of India,
  is contrary to constitutional ethos and the basic feature of
  republicanism enshrined in the Constitution.
       Notice of the special leave petitions was issued on
G 25.8.2010. After an adjournment, the Court passed detailed
  order dated 14.10.2011, which reads as under:
         "Although, the prayer made in this petition filed under
         Article 136 of the Constitution is for setting aside the order
         passed by the Division Bench of Allahabad High Court
H
ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                    83
            [G.S. SINGHVI, J]
directing consideration of the case of respondent No. 6 for A
providing 'Z' category security to him and his family
members, at the hearing Shri Harish N. Salve, Learned
Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that dehors the
facts of the case, the Court should examine important
issues affecting an important facet of the Constitutional B
democracy i.e. whether the country should have two.
categories of citizens, of which one enjoys all sorts of
privileges including unwanted security at public expense
and is also allowed to use different kinds of symbols which
represented the authority of the State in pre-independence     c
era and the fundamental rights to life and liberty of other
category are not protected. Shri Salve suggested that the
following questions may be considered by the Court:
 1.    Whether the permission to use signs and symbril·
       of authority, such as beacons, insignia, :..,1:'.
       convoys/escorts by public servants or any person
       who holds any office under the States or the Union
       of India, or any other person, is contrary to Article
       18 and 38 and the basic feature of republicanism
       enshrined in the Constitution?                          E
 2.    Whether the State was and is under an affirmative
       obligation to ensure that the vision of the founding
       fathers to change the perception of the State and
       its functionaries from rulers to public servants who
                                                               F
       are to serve rather than:govern the people, was
       implemented .in letter and spirit?

 3.    Whether by virtue of Article 21 read with Article 14,
       State is under an obligation to afford the same
       degree of protection to the safety and security of      G
       every person irrespective of any office held by such
       person or status of such person or any other factor?

 4.    Whether the grant of protection [by way of escorts
       or otherwise], particularly at the expense of the       H
    84        SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A              State, on the basis of an office held by a person or
               any other factor [other than a perceived need to
               grant heightened protection on account of
               aggravated threat to the life of any person on
               account of his lawful occupation, assessed on an
8              objective basis] is illegal, ultra vires and
               unconstitutional?

         5.    Whether the State is under an obligation to ensure
               that any heightened protection granted to any
               person, or any special security arrangements made
c              for any person, holding public office, is done in a
               manner that does not violate the principle of
               republicanism and the provisions or Art. 18 and 21
               of the Constitution?

D                    Shri Pallav Shishodia, learned senior
                     counsel appearing for respondent No.6 says
                     that the questions proposed by the learned
                     counsel appearing for the petitioner are of
                     great public importance and he will have no
E                    objection if same are considered by the
                     Court. He also suggested that the Court may
                     suo motu order impleadment of all the States
                     and Union Territories as parties so that they
                     may also make appropriate submissions.
F                    We have considered the submissions of the
                     learned counsel and are prima facie satisfied
                     first four of the five questions framed by Shri
                     Salve would require detailed examination.

G                    Let notice be issued to all the States and
                     Union Territories through their Secretaries,
                     Home Department so as to enable them to
                     file their written response in the context of
                     question No. 1 to 4 framed by learned senior
H
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                     85
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
                  counsel appearing for the petitioner. Notice     A
                  is returnable in six weeks.

                  Keeping in view the importance of the
                  questions framed hereinabove, we request
                  the learned Solicitor General to assist the
                                                                   B
                  Co1,1rt."

     On 17 .1.2013, the Court considered the prayer made in
the application filed on behalf of the SLP petitioner and passed
the following order:
                                                                   c
    "Shri Harish Salve, learned senior counsel representing
    the petitioner in S.L.P.(C) No.25237 of 2010 place before
    the Court an application for direction in which it has bee •
    prayed that a direction may be issued to all the States and
    Union Territories to furnish information under the following
                                                                   0
    headings:

    (a) The Rules, Orders or Guidelines, if any, in the State
    which prescribe the policy for permitting Red Lights on
    vehicles to various persons in the state.
                                                                   E
     (b) The Rules, Orders or Guidelines, if any, in the state
     which prescribe the policy of the state for permitting
     security personnel to individuals.

     (c) The Names and the designation of the persons to whom
     security personnel have been provided and the number of       F
     security persons provided to them.

     (d) Total cost borne by the state for providing security in
     terms as aforesaid.
                                                                   G
     (e) Total number of security personnel in the state and the
     total number of such personnel who are engaged in (i)
     Maintaining Law and Order, (ii) Crime Prevention and
     investigation and (iii) Traffic Management.

                                                                   H
    86       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A        Learned counsel for the States and Union Territories must
         ensure that affidavits of the responsible officers of the
         Home Department of their respective Slates and Union
         Territories are filed within three weeks from today. Any
         lapse in this regard will be viewed seriously.
B        For further consideration, list the cases on 07.02.2013."

       On the next effective date of hearing, i.e., 14.2.2013, the
  Court took into consideration two notes made available by the
  learned Amicus and passed detailed order, the relevant
C portions of which are reproduced below:

         "Before considering the issues raised in the 2nd note
         made available by Shri Salve, we deem it proper to issue
         the following directions:
D        1. All the State Governments and the Administration of
         Union Territories shall furnish the details of the total
         expenses incurred in providing security to public
         functionaries and private individuals other than holders of
         the constitutional office like the President, the Vice-
E        President, the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Lok
         Sabha, the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha and the Chief
         Justice of India and their counter parts in the States and
         Union Territories.

         2. Total number of persons other than the dignitaries, to
F
         whom reference has been made in the preceding
         paragraph, to whom security has been provided at the
         State expense giving the details of number of persons of
         various cadres deputed for providing security to the
         various persons.
G
         3. The details of the security provided to the children and
         other family members I relatives of the public functionaries
         within or outside the State/Union Territory.

H        4. The details of the persons who are facing criminal
   Af?HAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH                     87
                [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
    charges, charges of violating any provisions of law and to       A
    whom security has been provided at State expense.

    5." The details of the private individuals to whom the
    security has been provided at the cost of public exchequer,
    whether in lieu of payment made by them or otherwise.
                                                                     B
    6. Each State Government/Union Territory shall security
    provided to public functionaries and provide details of the
    review undertaken of the private individuals.

    7. All the States and Union Territories shall file copies of     c
    the Rules/Orders which authorises the police and other
    functionaries to close roads for movement of public
    functionaries or their visits.

    8. The notifications issued by the Central Government,
    State Governments and the Union Territories authorising          D
    use of Sirens other than by the man in uniform and those
    engaged and providing medical facilities to the patients
    and victims of accidents."

     When the case was taken up for hearing on 3.4.2013, Shri        E
Harish N. Salve made submissions with reference to the
following three questions:

    "1. Whether the use of beacons red-light and sirens by
    persons other than high constitutional functionaries is lawful
                                                                     F
    and constitutional?

    2. Whether the provision of security to persons other than
    the constitutional functionaries without corresponding
    increase in sanctioned strength and without a specific
    assessment of threat is lawful and constitutional?               G
    3. Whether the closure of roads for facilitating movement
    of VIPs is lawful and constitutional?"

    Further arguments were heard on 4.4.2013 and certain
                                                                     H
    88       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A   directions were issued in the light of the provisions of the Motor
    Vahicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the 1988 Act'), the Central Motor
    Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for short, 'the 1989 Rules')and the Rules
    framed by the State Governments, the relevant portions of which
    are extracted hereunder:
B
         ''The Motor Vehicles Act was enacted in 1988 and the
         Rules were framed by the Central Government and various
         State Governments in 1989. The legislative bodies and the
         authorities have not thought it proper to make appropriate
         amendments to bring the provisions of the Act and the
c        Rules in conformity with the aspirations of the people of a
         republic and even now a small section of the society
         considers itself to be as a special category as compared
         to other citizens. This appears to be the primary reason
         why the Governments after Governments have issued
D        notifications under Section 6 of the 1988 Act and the rules
         framed thereunder authorizing the use of beacons on
         government vehicles (some persons use such beacons
         even on private vehicles). The time has come when the use
         of beacons on the vehrcles, government or non-
E        government is drastically restricted so that the people's
         right to freedom of movement is not hindered in any
         manner whatsoever.

         Learned counsel representing some of the State
F        Governments have not controverted the assertion made by
         Shri Salve that not only the higt1 dignitaries on duty but large
         number of other elected and non-elected persons are
         allowed to use beacons and sirens/hooters causing
         serious invoncenience to the general public using the roads
         and even otherwise.
G
         Shri Salve also brought to our notice the fact that the
         vehicles of the State neighbouring NCT of Delhi use
         beacons with flashers and sirens even though they are not
         permitted to do so in the NCT of Delhi.
H
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                       89
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
    With a view to ensure that menace of beacons on vehicles          A
    and use of sirens is stopped except in the cases of heads
    of the constitutional institutions, we deem it proper to give
    an opportunity to the Central Government as also the
    Governments of all the States and the Administration of the
    Union Territories to amend the relevant provisions of the         B
    Rules and the notifications issJ!ed under Rule 108 of the
    Central Motor Vehicles Rules, '1989 and corresponding
    provisions in the State Rules as also Rule 119 for
    restricting the use of beacons by the heads of political
    executive, legislature and judiciary only and total               c
    prohibition on the use of siren except by police, ambulance,
    fire fighters, Army and those permitted in Rule 119(3) of
    the 1989 Rules and the corresponding Rules framed by
    the State Governments.

    We also deem it proper to indicate that it will be prudent        D
    for the Central Government and the State Governments as
    well as the administration of the Union Territories to
    substantially increase the fine for violation of the provisions
    of the 1988 Act and in particular those relating to the
    matters indicated hereinabove."                                   E

     Shri Mohan Parasaran, learned Solicitor General, Shri
Sidharth Luthra, learned Additional Solicitor General
representing the Union of India and Delhi Administration
respectively, and Shri Gaurav Bhatia, learned Additional              F
Advocate General, Uttar Pradesh agreed that unauthorized use
of red lights on motor vehicles and multi-toned horns deserves
to be.dealt with sternly and exemplary fine should be imposed
on the violators.

    After considering their statement, the Court adjourned the        G
case to enable them to get in touch with the concerned
authorities to find out a possible administrative and legislative
solution to this menace. However, neither the Central
Government nor the State Governments took any step for
                                                                      H
    90       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A   checking the menace of unauthorized use of red lights and
    multi-toned horns.

         On the next date of hearing, i.e., 19.8.2013, the Court
    heard the arguments on the interpretation of Rules 1OB and
    119 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and notification
8
    dated 11.1.2002 issued by the Central Government.
    Thereafter, the learned Solicitor General made available a short
    note on behalf of the Union of India (Ministry of Road, Transport
    and Highways) and the learned Amicus handed over note
    containing the gist of his submissions. Two further notes were
C   made available on 4.10.2013 by Shri Sushi! Kumar Jain,
    Senior Advocate representing the SLP petitioner.

          Shri Harish Salve, learned Amicus pointed out that Rule
    108(1) imposes total prohibition against showing a red light
o   to the front or light other than red to rear and that exemption
    envisaged by proviso (iii) to Rule 108(1) is limited to a vehicle
    carrying "high dignitaries" as specified by the Central
    Government or the State Governments, from time to time. Shri
    Salve emphasized that even though the term "high dignitaries"
E   has not been defined in the 1988 Act and the 1989 Rules,
    keeping in view the Preamble of the Constitution which talks
    of equality of status and the dignity of individual, that term must
    be given a restricted interpretation to include only Heads of
    three wings of the Republic, i.e., the President, the Vice-
    President, the Governors of the States, the Prime Minister, the
F
    Chief Ministers, Speaker of the Lower House of Parliament,
    Speakers of Legislative Assemblies and Chairmen of
    Legislative Councils and the Chief Justice of India and the
    Chief Justices of the High Courts. He submitted that while the
    Central Government has restricted the use of red light with or
G   without flasher on the top front of a vehicle carrying high
    dignitaries who have been specified in Notification dated
    11.1.2002, as amended by Notification dated 28.7.2005, and
    that too while on duty, the State Governments have exercised
    the rule making power under Section 11 O and allowed the use
H   of red lights with or without flasher by a very large number of
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                      91
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
public representatives at various levels as also the public         A
servants and made a mockery of the object of proviso (iii) to
Rule 108(1). The learned Amicus submitted that the use of red
light with or without flasher on the top of the government
vehicles allotted to a large body of public representatives and
civil servants has become a status symbol and those using           B
such vehicles treat themselves as a class different than ordinary
citizens. According to Shri Salve, the widespread use of red
lights on government vehicles in the country is reflective of the
mentality of those who served British Government in India and
treated the natives as slaves. He drew our attention to the rules   c
framed by various State Governments and the notifications
issued permitting use of red lights with or without flasher on
the top of the vehicles to show that the idea of permitting red
light on the vehicle carrying "high dignitaries" has been reduced
to a farce.
                                                                    D
     Shri Salve also referred to Rule 119 of the 1989 Rules
and argued that despite total prohibition on use of multi-toned
horns, vehicles used by public servants of different categories
are indulging in rampant violation of the prohibition. Shri Salve
pointed out that in terms of Rule 119(3), only in the vehicles      E
used as ambulances or for fire fighting or salvage purposes
or vehicles used by police officers or operators of construction
equipment vehicles or officers of the Motor Vehicles
Department in the course of their duty or on construction
equipment vehicles, the registering authority can permit use of     F
multi-toned horns, but such horns are being used by public
representatives from the lowest to the highest level and civil
servants of every possible category and those entrusted with
the task of enforcing these provisions contemptuously overlook
the violations.                                                     G
     Shri Mohan Parasaran, learned Solicitor General argued
that in the absence Of Challenge to the Vires and
constitutionality of Rule 108, this Court cannot impose
restriction on the power of the Central Government to specify
                                                                    H
    92       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (2013] 17 S.C.R.


A   the vehicles carrying "high dignitaries" which may be permitted
    to use red light with or without flasher. He further argued that
    there is no valid reason to give a restricted meaning to the term
    "high dignitaries" and it should be left to the Central and the
    State Governments to specify the "high dignitaries". According
B   to the learned Solicitor General, the vehicles carrying certain
    dignitaries and category of officials constitute a class by
    themselves and no illegality has been committed by the State
    Governments by allowing use of red lights on the vehicles
    carrying a large number of public representatives and public
c   servants. He submitted that fixing of red lights on the vehicles
    used by civil servants is essential for effective discharge of their
    duties. Learned Solicitor General submitted that such use of
    red lights facilitates the movement of public representatives and
    civil servants. He then submitted that clause (e) of notification
    dated 11.1.2002 contains conditions for exercise of power by
0
    the State Government to grant exemption and argued that in
    some cases, the State Government might have violated the
    conditions specified in notification dated 11.1.2002, but that
    cannot be a ground for restricting the use of red lights on the
    vehicles used by government officers.
E
       Shri Parasaran submitted that (1) men in uniform; (2)
  operational agencies which require un-hindered access to the
  road for performance of their duty; (3) those engaged in
  emergency duties such as ambulance services, fire services,
F emergency maintenance etc; and (4) officials in Districts, etc.,
  such as Divisional Commissioner, OM, ADM, SOM, Executive
  Magistrates or where their functional requirements necessitate
  smooth, fast and easy passage in certain circumstances, are
  not entitled to use red light on their vehicles but lights of other
G colours, e.g., blue. white, multicoloured etc.

         On the issue of use of multi-toned horns, the learned
    Solicitor General submitted that Rule 119(2) imposes total
    prohibition on the fittings of such horns on any vehicle subject
    to the exceptions specified in clause (3) thereof and the Union
H
       ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                        93
                   [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]

    of India is fully committed to ensure total compliance of the         A
"   prohibition.

         Shri Siddharth Luthra, learned Additional Solicitor General
    supported the argument of learned Solicitor General and
    submitted that the term "high dignitaries" should be so               B
    interpreted as to include all those who are holding constitutional
    offices, i.e., the President, the Vice-President, the Prime
    Minister, the Speaker of Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India,
    the Judges of the Supreme Court, Chairman of the Union Public
    Service Commission, the Comptroller and Auditor General, the
    Chief Election Commissioner and their counterparts in the
                                                                          c
    States. Shri Luthra also emphasized that use of the lights of
    different colours on the vehicles carrying civil servants is
    absolutely imperative because that facilitates their movement
    and enables them to effectively discharge their duties.
                                                                          D
         We have considered the respective arguments and
    perused the provisions of the 1988 Act, the 1989 Rules as also
    the Rules framed by various State Governments and
    Administration of Union Territories. We have also gone through
    notifications dated 11.1.2002 and 28.7.2005 issued by the             E
    Central Government under proviso (iii) to Rule 108(1) of the
    1989 Rules.

         The basics of Indian Republic were outlined in the
    Resolution moved by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru in the meeting
                                                                          F
    of the Constituent Assembly held on 13.12.1946. The relevant
    portions of the same are extracted below:

        "(1 )This Constituent Assembly declares its firm and solemn
        resolve to proclaim India as an Independent Sovereign
        Republic and to draw up for her future governance a               G
        Constitution; (2)WHEREIN the territories that now comprise
        British India, the territories that now form the Indian States,
        and such other parts of India as are outside British India
        and the States as well as such other territories as are
        willing to be constituted into the Independent Sovereign          H
        94       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2013] 17 S.C.R.


    A        India, shall be a Union of them all; and (3) WHEREIN the
             said territories, whether with their present boundaries or
             with such others as may be determined by the Constituent
             Assembly and ihereafter according to the Law of the
             Constitution, shall possess and retain the status of
    B        autonomous Units, together with residuary powers, and
             exercise all powers and functions of government and
             administration, save and except such powers and functions
             as are vested in or assigned tci the. Union, or as are
             inherent or implied in the Union or resulting therefrom; and
    c        (4) WHEREIN all power and authority of the Sovereign
             Independent India. its constituent parts and organs of
             government. are derived from the people; and
             (5\WHEREIN shall be guaranteed and secured to all the
             people of India justice. social. economic and political;
             equality of status, of opportunity, and before the law:
    D
             freedom of thought. expression. belief. faith worship,
             vocation. association and action. subject to law and public
             morality; and (6)WHEREIN adequate safeguards shall be
             provided for minorities, backward and tribal areas, and
             depressed and other backward classes; and
    E        (?)WHEREBY shall be maintained the integrity of the
             territory of the Republic and its sovereign rights on land,
             sea, and air according to Justice and the law of civilised
             nations, and (8)this ancient land attains its rightful and
             honoured place in the world and make its full and willing
    F        contribution to the promotion of world peace and the
             welfare of mankind.

             I hope, the House will notice that in this Resolution,
             although we have not used the word 'democratic' because
    G        we thought it is obvious that the word 'republic' contains
             that word and we did not want to use unnecessary words
             and redundant words, but we have done something much
             more than using the word. We have given the content of
             democracy in this Resolution and not only the content of
    H



I
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH                      95
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
    democracy but the content, if I may say so, of economic         A
    democracy in this Resolution.

    The Resolution placed before you to-day has equality as
    its underlying theme. The different sections of the country
    have been given autonomy and India as a whole remains
                                                                    B
    one with full sovereignty. We shall stand united in affairs
    which demand our unity. The one important thing in the
    Resolution is the recognition of India as a free country. Our
    country is one and yet we shall give full freedom to its
    various sections to have for themselves'whatever
   .administration they liked. The present division of our          C
    country into provinces may change. We shall do justice to
    all communities and give them full freedom in their social
    and religious affairs.

    The word 'people' means all the people. I am myself a           D
    servant of the farmers. To work with them is my highest
    glorv. The term people' is comprehensive and contains all
    the people. It is. therefore. my opinion that no adjective
    should be attached·to it."
                                                                    E
                                             (emphasis added)

     On 15.8.1947, Dr. Rajendra Prasad addressed the
Constituent Assembly of India wherein he identified the roles
of various sections of the society and the Government. The
English translation of the address is reproduced below:             F

    "Let us in this momentous hour of our history, when we are
    assuming power for the governance of our country, recall .
    in grateful remembrance the services and sacrifices of all
    those who laboured and suffered for the achievement of G
    the independence we are attaining today. Let us on this
    historic occasion pay our homage to the maker of our
    modern history, Mahatma Gandhi, who has inspired and
    guided us through all these years of trial and travail and

                                                                    H
    96       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013) 17 S.C.R.


A        who in spite of the weight of years is still working in his
         own way to complete what is left yet unaccomplished.

          Let us gratefully acknowledge that while our achievement
          is in no small measure due to our own sufferings, and
          sacrifices, it is also the result of world forces and events
B
          and last though not least it is the consummation and
          fulfilment of the historic traditions and democratic ideals
          of the British race whose farsighted leaders and statesmen
          saw the vision and gave the pledges which are being
          redeemed today. We are happy to have in our midst as a
c         representative of that race Viscount Mountbatten of Burma
          and his consort who have worked hard and played such
          an important part in bringing this about during the closing
          scenes of this drama. The period of domination by Britain
          over India ends today and our relationship with Britain is
D         henceforward going to rest on a basis of equality, of mutual
         ·goodwill and mutual profit.

         It is undoubtedly a day of rejoicing. But there is only one ·
         thought which mars and detracts from the fulness of this
E        happy event. India, which was made by God and Nature
         to be one, which culture and tradition and history of
         millenniums have made one, is divided today and many
         there are on the other side of the boundary who would
         much rather be on this side. To them we send a word of
         cheer and assurance and ask them not to give way to
F
         panic or despair but to live with faith and courage in peace
         with their neighbours and fulfil the duties of loyal citizenship
         and thus win their rightful place. We send our greetings to
         the new Dominion which is being established today there
         and wish it the best luck in its great work of governing that
G        region and making all its citizens happy and prosperous.
         We feel assured that they all will be treated fairly and justly
         without any distinction or discrimination. Let us hope and
         pray that the day will come when even those who have
         insisted upon and brought about this dlvision will realise
H
ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH                     97
            [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
 India's essential oneness and we shall be united once          A
 again. We must realise however that this can be brought
 about not by force but by large heartedness and co-
 operation and by so managing our affairs on this side as
 to attract those who have parted. It may appear to be a
 dream but it is no more fantastic a dream than that of those   B
 who wanted a division and may well be realised even
 sooner than we dare hope for today.

More than a day of rejoicing it is a day of dedication for
all of us to build the India of our dreams. Let us turn our C
eyes away from the past and fix our gaze on the future. We
have no quarrel with other nations and countries and let
 us hope no one will pick a quarrel with us. By history and
 tradition we are a peaceful people and India wants, to be
 at peace with the world. India's Empire outside her own
borders has been of a different kind from all other Empires. · D
 India's conquests have been the conquests of spirit which
 did not impose heavy chains of slavery, whether of iron or
 of gold, on others but tied other lands and other peoples
JQ_her with the more enduring ties of golden silk-of culture
 and-civilisation, of religion and knowledge (gyan). We shall E
 follow that same tradition and shall have no ambition save
 that of contributing our little mite to the building of peace
 and freedom in a war-distracted world by holding aloft the
 banner under which we have marched to victory and
 placing in a practical manner in the hands of the world the F
 great weapon of Non-violence which has achieved this
  unique result. India has a great part to play. There is
 something in her life and culture which has enabled her to
 survive the onslaughts of time and today we witness a new
 birth full of promise, if only we prove ourselves true to our G
 ideals.

 Let us resolve to create conditions in this countrv when
 every individual will be free and provided with the
 wherewithal to develop and rise to his fullest stature. when
                                                                H
    98       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A        poverty and squalor and ignorance and ill-health will have
         vanished. when the distinction between high and low,
         between rich and poor. will have disappeared •. when
         religion will not only be professed and preached and
         practised freely but will have become a cementing force
8        for binding man to man and not serve as a disturbing and
         disrupting force dividing and separating, when
         untouchability will have been forgotten like an unpleasant
         night dream, when exploitation of man by man will have
         ceased, when facilities and special arrangements will have
c        been provided for the adimjatis of India and for all others
         who are backward, to enable them to catch up to others
         anti when this land will have not only enough food to feed
         its teeming millions but will once again have become a
         land flowing with rivers of milk, when men and women will
         be laughing and working for all they are worth in fields and
         factories, when every cottage and hamlet will be humming
         with the sweet music of village handicrafts and maids 'will·
         be busy with them and singing to their tune-when the sun
         and the moon will be shining on happy homes and loving
         faces.
E
         To bring all this about we need all the idealism and
         sacrifice, all the intelligence and diligence, all the
         determination and the power of organisation that we can
         muster. We have many parties and groups with differing
F        ideals a";d ideologies. They are all trying to convert the
         country to their own ideologies and to mould the
         constitution and the administration to suit their own view
         point. While they have the right to do so, the country and
         the nation have the right to demand loyalty from them. All
G        must realise that what is needed most today is a great
         construclrve effort-not strife, hard solid work-not
         argumentation, and let us hope that all will be prepared to
         make their contribution. We want the peasant to grow
         more food, we want the workers to produce more goods,
H
         we want our industrialists to use their intelligence, tact and
ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                      99
            [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
resourcefulness for the common good. To all we must              A
assure conditions of decent and healthy life and
opportunities for self-improvement and self-realisation.

Not orily have the people to dedicate themselves to this
great task that lies ahead but those who have so far been
                                                                 B
playing the role of rulers and regulators of the lives of our
men and women have to assume the role of servants. Our
army has won undying glory in distant lands for its bravery
and great fighting qualities: Our soldiers, sailors and airmen
have to realise that they now form a national army on whom
devolves the duty not only of defending the freedom which        c
we have won but also to help in a constructive way in
building up a ~ew life. There is no place in the armed forces
of our country which is not open to our people, and what
is more they are required to take the highest places as
soon as they can so that they may take full charge of our        D
defences. Our public servants in various departments of
Government have to shed their role as rulers and have to
become true servants of the people that their compeers
are in all free countries. The people and the Government
on their side have to give them their trust and assure them      E
conditions of service in keeping with the lives of the people
in whose midst they have to live and serve.

We welcome the Indian States which have acceded to
India and to their people we offer our hands of                  F
comradeship. To the princes and the rulers of the States
we say that we have no designs against them. We trust
they will follow the example of the King of England and
become constitutional rulers. They would do well to take
as their model the British monarchical system which has          G
stood the shock of two successive world wars when so
many other monarchies in Europe have toppled down.

 To Indians settled abroad in British Colonies and
 elsewhere we send our good wishes and assurance of our
 abiding interest in their welfare. To our minorities we give    H
    100       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2013) 17 S.C.R.


A         the assurance that they will receive fair and just treatment
          and their rights will be respected and protected.

          One of the great tasks which we have in hand is to
           complete the constitution under which not only will freedom
           and liberty be assured to each and all but which will enable
B
          us to achieve and attain and enjoy its fulfilment and its fruits.
          We must accomplish this task as soon as possible so that
          we may begin to live and work under a constitution of our
          own making, of which we may all be proud, and which· it
          may become our pride and privilege to defend and to
c         preserve to the lasting good of our people and for the
          service of mankind. In framing that constitution we shall
          naturally draw upon the experience and knowledge of other
          countries and nations no less than on our own traditions
          and surroundings and may have at times to disregard the
D         lines drawn by recent history and lay down new boundary
          lines not only of Provinces but also of distribution of
          powers and functions. Our ideal is to have a constitution
          that will enable the people's will to be expressed and
          enforced and that will not only secure liberty to the
E         individual but also reconcile and make !hat .. liberty
          subservient to the common good.

          We have up to now been taking a pledge to achieve
          freedom and to, undergo all sufferings and sacrifices for
F         it. Time has come when we have to take a pledge of
          another kind. Let no one imagine that the time for work and
          sacrifice is gone and the time for enjoying the fruits thereof
          has come. Let us realise that the demand on our
          enthusiasm and capacity for unselfish work in the future will
          be as 'great as, if not greater than, what it has ever been
G
          before. We have, therefore, to dedicate ourselves once
          again to the great cause that beckons us. The task is great,
          the times are propitious. Let us pray that we may have the
          strength, the wisdom and the courage to fulfil it."

H                                                    (emphasis added)
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                      101
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
        Both the leaders, who were visionaries of the time, laid A
  emphasis on the need for ensuring equality among all, abolition
  of distinction between high and low, between rich and poor and
  change of the role of various segments of governance and also
  the need for protecting the dignity of every individual.
'
                                                                      B
        When we achieved independence in 1947, India was a
  baby aiming to grow to become one of the respected members
  of the world community. The leaders of Independence
  movement undertook an onerous task of framing the
  Constitution for the country. They studied the Constitutions of
 ·various countries and adopted their best provisions for creating C
  an egalitarian society with the aim of ensuring justice, - social,
  economic and political, various types of freedoms, equality of
  opportunity and of status and ensuring dignity of every
  individual. During the drafting of the Constitution, the
   Preliminary notes on Fundamental Rights issued by the D
  Constitutional Advisor, B.N. Rau, specifically dealt with the
  issue of equality using examples from various Constitutions to
  emphasize its importance. One of the issues highlighted in the
  note was that if the instinct of power is concentrated in few
  individuals then naked greed for power will destroy the basics E
  of democratic principles. But, what we have done in the last
  four decades would shock the most established political
   systems. The best political and executive practices have been
   distorted to such an extent that they do not even look like
   distant cousins of their original forms. The best example of this F
   is the use of symbols of authority including the red lights on the
   vehicles of public representatives from the lowest to the highest
   and civil servants of various cadres. The red lights symbolize
   power and a stark differentiation between those who are
   allowed to use it and the ones who are not. A large number of G
  those using vehicles with red lights have no respect for the laws
   of the country and they treat the ordinary citizens with contempt.
  The use of red lights on the vehicles of public representatives
  and civil servants has perhaps no parallel in the world
   democracies.
                                                                     H
    102       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A        For deciding the questions framed by Shri Salve, it will be
    useful to notice Section 70 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for
    short, 'the 1939 Act'), Sections 109, 11 O and 111 of the 1989
    Act and Rules 108, 108-A and 119 of the 1989 Rules. The
    same read as under:
B
          Section 70 of the 1939 Act:

          "Power to make rules - (1) A State Government may make
          rules regulating the construction, equipment and
          maintenance of motor vehicles and trailers (with respect
c         to all matters other than the matters referred to in clause
          (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 69-B.

          (2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing
          power, rules may be made under this section governing
D         any of the following matters, either generally in respect of
          motor vehicles or trailers or in respect of motor vehicles
          or trailers of a particular class or in particular
          circumstances namely-

          (a) x x x x
E
          (b)seating arrangements in public service vehicles and the
          protection of passengers against the weather;

          (c) x x x x

F         (d) brakes and steering gear;

          (e) the use of safety glass;

          (f)signaling appliances, lamps and reflectors;

G         (g) speed governors;

          (h) the emission of smoke, visible vapour, sparks, ashes,
          grit or oil;

          (i\ the reduction of noise emitted by or caused by vehicles;
H
ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                    103
            [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
{j)prohibiting or restricting the use of audible signals at      A
certain times or in certain places;

(k) prohibiting the carrying of appliances likely to cause
annoyance or danger;

(I) the periodical testing and inspection of vehicles by         B
prescribed authorities;

(m) the particulars other than registration marks to be
exhibited by vehicles and the manner in which they shall
be exhibited; and                                                C

(n) the use of trailers with motor vehicles."

Sections 109, 110 and 111 of the 1988 Act:

"Section 109. General provision regarding construction           o
and maintenance of vehicles - (1) Every motor vehicle shall
be so constructed and so maintained as to be at all times
under the effective control of the person driving the vehicle.

(2) Every motor vehicle shall be so constructed as to have
right hand steering control unless it is equipped with a         E
mechanical or electrical signaling device of a prescribed
nature.                                 ·

(3) If the Central Government is of the opinion that it is
necessary or expedient so to do in public interest, it may       F
by order published in the Official Gazette, notify that any
article or process used by a manufacturer shall conform
to such standard as may be specified in that order.

Section 110. Power of Central Government to make                 G
rules. -

(1) The Central Government.may make rules regulating the
construction, equipment and maintenance of motor
vehicles and trailers with respect to all or any of the
following matters, namely :-                                     H
    104       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A         (a) the width, height, length and overhand of vehicles and
          of the loads carried;

          (b) the size, nature, maximum retail price and condition of
          tyres, including embossing thereon of date and year of
          manufacture, and the maximum load carrying capacity;
B
          (c) brakes and steering gear;

          (d) the use of safety glasses including prohibition of the
          use of tinted safety glasses;
c         (e) signalling appliances, lamps and reflectors;

          (f) speed governors;

          (g) the emission of smoke, visible vapour, sparks, ashes,
o         grit or oil;

          (h) the reduction of noise emitted by or caused by vehicles;

          (i) the embossment of chassis number and engine number
          and the date of manufacture;
E
          0) safety belts, handle bars 9r motor cycles, auto-dippers
          and other equipment's essential for safety of drivers,
          passengers and other road user.

          (k) standards of the components used in the vehicle as
F         inbuilt safety devices;

          (I} provision for transportation of goods of dangerous or
          hazardous nature to human life;

          (m) standards for emission of air pollutants;
G
          (n) installation of catalytic convertors in the class of vehicles
          to be prescribed;

          (o) the placement of audio-visual or radio or tape recorder ·
H         type of devices in public vehicles;
ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                       105
            [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
(p) warranty after sale of vehicle and norms therefore:             A
Provided that any rules relating to the matters dealing with
the protection of environment, so far as may be, shall be
made after consultation with the Ministry of the Government
of India dealing with environment.
                                                                    B
(2) Rules may be made under sub-section (1) governing
the matters mentioned therein, including the manner of
ensuring the compliance with such matters and the
maintenance of motor vehicles in respect of such matters,
either generally in respect of motor vehicles or trailers or        C
in respect of motor vehicles or trailers of a particular class
or in particular circumstances.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, -
(a) the Central Government may exempt any class of motor
vehicles from the provisions of this Chapter;                       D

(b) a State Government may exempt any motor vehicle or
any class or description of motor vehicles from the rules
made under sub-section (1) subject to such conditions as
may be prescribed by the Central Government.
                                                                    E
Section 111.Power of State Government to make rules -
(1) A State Government may make rules regulating the
construction, equipment and maintenance of motor
vehicles and trailers with respect to all matters other than
the matters specified in sub-se\:tion (1) of section 110.           F
(2)Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing
power, rules may be made under this section governing
all or any of the following matters either generally in respect
of motor vehicles or trailers or in respect of motor vehicles
or trailers of a particular class or description or in particular   G
circumstances, namely:-
 (a)   seating arrangements in public service vehicles and
       the protection of passengers against the weather;

                                                                    H
    106          SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2013] 17 S.C.R.

A          (b)    prohibiting or restricting the use of audible signals
                  at certain times or in certain places;

           (c)    prohibiting the carrying of appliances likely to cause
                  annoyance or danger;
B          (d)    the periodical testing and inspection of vehicles by
                  prescribed authorities (and fees to be charged for
                  such test);

           (e)    the particulars other than registration marks to be
c                 exhibited by vehicles and the manner in which they
                  shall be exhibited;

           (f)    the use of trailers with motor vehicles; and

           (g)    x x x X:'
D
          Rules 108. 108-A and 119 of the 1989 Rules:

          "108. Use of red, white or.blue light.-(1) No motor vehicle
          shall show a red light to the front or light other than red to
          rear:
E
          Provided that the provisions of this rule shall not apply to-

          (i) the internal lighting of the vehicle; or

          (ii) the amber light, if displayed by any direction indicator
F         or top light or as top light used on vehicle for operating
          within the premises like airports, ports without going
          outside the said premises on to public roads;

          (iii) a vehicle carrying high dignitaries as specified by the
G         Central Government or the State Government, as the case
          may be, from time to time;

          (iv) the blinker type of red light with purple glass fitted to
          an ambulance van used for carrying patients; or
H
ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                      107
            [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
 (v) to a vehicle having a lamp fitted with an electrical bulb,   A
-if the power of the bulb does not exceed seven watts and
 the lamp is fitted with frosted glass or any other material
 which has the effect of diffusing the light;
                                           '

(vi) white light illuminating the rear numper plate;
                                                                  B
(vii) white light used while' reversing;

(viii) plough light provided in agricultural tractors for
illuminating the implement's working area on the ground
in agricultural .field operations.                                c
 (2) Use of blue light with flasher shall be determined and
 notified by the State Governments at their discretion;

(3) Use of blue light with or without flasher shall be
permitted as top light on vehicles escorting high dignitaries     D
entitled to the use of red light;

 (4) Use of multi-coloured red, blue and white light shall be
 permitted only on vehicles specifically designated for
 emergency duties and shall be specifically specified by          E
 State Governments;

 (5) The State Government shall inform the Central
 Government regarding publication of notifications issued
 by the concerned State Government under sub-rule (2) and
 under clause (e) of the Notification No. S.O. 52(E), dated       F
 11th January, 2002, published in the Gazette of India,
 Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, regarding use
 of red light on top of vehicle being used by dignitaries;

 (6) In case vehicle is not carrying dignitaries, red or blue     G
 light, as the case may be, light shall not be used and be
 covered by black cover.

 1.Q§:6. Use of red or white light on construction equipment
 vehicles.-No construction equipment vehicle shall show
                                                                  H
    108       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A         a red light to the front or light other than red to the rear:

          Provided that the provision of this rule shall not apply to:-

          (i) the internal lighting of the VP.hicle;

B         (ii) the amber light, if displayed by any direction indicator
          or top light;

          (iii) white light illuminating the rear or side registration
          number plate;

C         (iv) white light used while reversing;

          (v) light provided for illuminating the implement's working
          area on the ground in off-highway or construction
          operations.
D         119. Horns.-(1) On and after expiry of one year from the
          date of commencement of the Central Motor Vehicles
          (Amendment) Rules, 1999, every motor vehicle, agricultural
          tractor, power tiller and construction equipment vehicle
          manufactured shall be fitted with an electric horn or other
E         devices conforming to the requirements of IS: 1884-
          1992, specified by the Bureau of Indian Standards for use
          by the driver of the vehicle and capable of giving audible
          and sufficient warning of the approeich or position of the
          vehicle:
F
          Provided that on and from 1st January, 2003, the horn
          installation requirements for motor vehicle shall be as per
          AIS-014 specifications, as may be amended from time to
          time, till such time as corresponding Bureau of Indian
          Standards specifications are notified.
G
          (2) No motor vehicle including agricultural tr?ctor shall be
          fitted with any multi-toned horn giving a succession of
          different notes or with any other sound-producing d~vice
          giving an unduly harsh, shrill, loud or alarming noise.
H
  · ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH                        109
                [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
    (3) Notbing contained in sub-rule (2) shall prevent the use          A
    on vehicles used as ambulance or for fire fighting or
    salvage purposes or on ,vehicles used by police officers
    or operators of construction equipment vehicles or officers
    of the Motor Vehicles Department in the course of their
    duties or on construction equipment vehicles of such                 B
    sound signals as may be approved by the registering
    authority in whose jurisdiction such vehicles are kept."

     In exercise of the power vested in it under proviso (iii) to
Rule 108(1) of the 1989 Rules, the Central Government issued             C
Notification SO 52(E) dated 11.01.2002 which was amended
by Notification SO 1070(E) dated 28.7.2005. The same reads
as under:

    "(a) red light with flasher on the top front of the vehicle, while
    on duty anywhere in the country-                                     D

      (1)   President,

      (2)   Vice-President

      (3)   Prime Minister                                               E
      (4)   Former Presidents

      (5)   Deputy Prime Minister

      (6)   Chief Justice of India                                       F

      (7)   Speaker of Lok Sabha

      (8)   Cabinet Ministers of the Union

      (9)   Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission                         G

      (10) Former Prime Ministers

      (11) Leaders of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha and Lok
           Sabha
                                                                         H
    110          SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A          (12) Judges of the Supreme Court.

           (b)    red light without flasher on the top front of the
                  vehicle, while on duty anywhere in the country-

           (1)    Chief Election Commissioner
8
           (2)    Comptroller and Auditor General of India

           (3)    .Deputy Chairman, Rajya Sabha

           (4)    Deputy Speaker, Lok Sabha
c
           (5)    Ministers of the State of the Union

           (6) · Members of the Planning Commission

           (7)    Attorney General of India
D
           (8)    Cabinet Secretary

           (9)    Chiefs of Staff of the three services holding the rank
                  of full General or equivalent rank
E          (10) Deputy Ministers of the Union

           (11) Officiating Chiefs of Staff or the three services
                holding the rank of Lt. General or equivalent rank

           (12) Chairman, Central Administrative Tribunal
F
           (13) Chairman, Minorities Commission

           (14) Chairman, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
                Tribes Commission
G
           (15) Chairman, Union Public Service Commission

          (c) Any vehicle carrying the dignitary formally designated
          as equivalent in rank, status and privileges to those
          dignitaries referred to in Items (a) and (b) above shall be
H         entitled to use the red light as per the corresponding
   ABhAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                     111
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
    privileges. The vehicles carrying the dignitaries assigned      A
    rank in their personal capacities by the Ministry of Home
    Affairs shall tre entitled to use red light as per the
    corresponding privileges assigned to those dignitaries
    referred -to in items (a) and (b) above.
                                                                    B
    (d)ln case .the vehicle fitted with red light on top front is
    not carrying the dignitaries, then such red light shall not
    be used and be covered by a black cover.

    (e) The Siple Governments and Union Territory
    Administrations shall issue similar notifications on the use    C
    of red light in respect of high dignitaries of their State
    Governments or Union Territory Administrations, such as
    Governor, Lt.Governor, Chief Minister, Chief Justices and
    Judges of High Courts, Chairman, Speaker and Cabinet
    Ministers of State/Union Territory Legislatures, etc., as the   D
    case may be."

                                             (emphasis added)

      We shall first deal with the issue of use of multi-toned
horns in violation of Rule 119 of the 1989 Rules and the            E
corresponding Rules framed by the State Governments and the
Administration of the Union Territories. Since the learned
Solicitor General and the Additional Solicitor General are in
agreement with the learned Amicus that the prohibition
contained in Rule 119(2) on the use of multi-toned horns giving     F
a succession of different notes or with any other sound
producing device giving an unduly harsh, shrill, loud or alarming
noise is absolute with certain exceptions specified in sub-rule
(3), the only thing required to be done by the Central and the
State Governments is to implement the prohibition in its letter     G
and spirit. Their failure to do so for last almost 24 years is
inexplicable. The contemptuous disregard to the prohibition by
people in power, holders of public offices, civil servants and
even ordinary citizens is again reflective of 'Raj Mentality' and
is antithesis of the concept of a Republic. We feel that the only   H
        112      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2013] 17 S.C.R.


    A   possible remedy to curb the menace of use of multi-toned horns
        is to impose exemplary fine on the violators and ensure its
        rigorous enforcement by the concerned authoritie.s and
        agencies.

    B       On the issue of use of vehicles with red lights, we were
      inclined to agree with Shri Harish Salve, learned Amicus that
      use of signs and symbols of authority such as red lights, etc.,
      is contrary to the constitutional ethos and the basic feature of
      republicanism, but, on a deeper consideration: we have felt
    C persuaded to accept the submissions of the learned Solicitor
      General and the Additional Solicitor General that the term "high
      dignitaries" used in proviso (iii) to Rule 108(1) of the 1989
      Rules would take within its fold various constitutional
      functionaries, i.e., holders of the constitutional offices. When the·
      framers of the Constitution have considered it appropriate to
    0
      treat those occupying constitutional positions as a special
      category, there is no reason for the Court to exclude them·from
      the ambit of the term "high dignitaries". The use of red lights
      on the vehicles carrying the holders of constitutional posts will
      in no manner compromise with the dignity of other citizens and
    E individuals or embolden them to think that they are superior to
      other people, more so, because this distinction would be
      available to them only while on duty and would be co-terminus
      with their tenure. However, the Governments of most of the
      States and Administration of Union Territories have framed rules
    F and issued notifications allowing use of red lights on the vehicles
      carrying large number of persons other than "high dignitaries".
      They have also used the power of issuing notifications to
      enlarge the list of the persons entitled to use red lights with or
      without flashers whether on duty or otherwise. Most of these
    G notifications are far beyond the scope of clause 'c' of
      Notifications dated 11.1.2002 and 28.7.2005 issued by the
      Central Government. It also deserves to be mentioned that
      there has been abysmal failure on the part of the concerned
      authorities and agencies of various State Governments and the
    H Administration of the Union Territories to check misuse of the




I
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTIAR PRADESH                      113
               [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]

vehicles with red lights on their top. So much so that a large       A
number of persons are using red lights on their vehicles for
committing crimes in different parts of the country and they do
so with impunity because the police officials are mostly scared
of checking vehicles with red lights, what to say of imposing
fine or penalty.                                                     B

     In the result, we hold as under:
                                   '-
      1.    The term "high dignitaries" used in proviso (iii} to
            Rule 108( 1) of the 1989 Rules takes within its fold
            the holders of various posts, positions and offices      c
            specified in the Constitution.

      2.    The motor vehicles carrying "high dignitaries"
            specified by the Central Government and their
            counterparts specified by the State Government           D
            may be fitted with red lights but the red lights with
            or without flasher can be used only while the
            specified high dignitary is on duty and not
            otherwise.

      3.    The State Governments and Administration of              E
            Union Territories cannot enlarge the scope of the
            term "high dignitaries" beyond what is prescribed
            in clauses 'c' and 'd' of Notifications dated
            11.1.2002 and 28.7.2005 issued by the Central
            Government. Therefore, they shall amend the              F
            relevant rules and notifications to bring them in tune
            with the 1989 Rules and notifications dated
            11.1.2002 and 28. 7 .2002 issued by the Central
            Government. This exercise must be completed
            within a period of three months.                         G

      4.    The men in uniform; operational agencies which
            require un-hindered access to the roads for
            performance of their duty; those engaged in
            emergency duties such as ambulance services, fire
                                   ot         '              .       H
    114        SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2013] 17 S.C.R.


A               services, emergency maintenance etc, and police
                vehicles used as escorts or pilots or for law and
                order duties shall not be entitled to have red lights
                but lights of other colours, e.g., blue, white,
                multicoloured etc.
B
          5.    No motor vehicles except those specified in Rule
                119(3) of the 1989 Rules or similar provisions
                contained in the rules framed by the State
                Governments or the Administration of Union
                Territories shall be fitted with multi-toned horns
c               giving a succession of different notes or with any
                other sound producing device giving an unduly
                harsh, shrill, loud or alarming noise.

          6.    The police officers and other authorities entrusted
D               with the task of enforcing the provisions of the 1988
                Act and the Rules framed thereunder must
                discharge their duties without any fear or favour and
                should impose appropriate penalty on those who
                violate the prohibition contained in Rule 108(1) and ·
E               Rule 119 and similar rules framed by the State
                Governments and the Administration of Union
                Territories. The owners/users of the vehicles fitted
                with multi-toned horns other than those allowed to
                use such horns under Rule 119(3) of the 1989 Rules
F
                or corresponding rules framed by the State
                Governments and the Administration of the Union
                Territories shall, with in a period of one month from
                today, remove the multi-toned horns. The officers
                authorised to enforce the provisions of the 1988 Act
                and the rules framed thereunder by the Central
G               Government, the State Governments and the
                Administration of Union Territories shall also ensure
                that multi-toned horns are removed from all the
                vehicles except tfiose specified in rule 119(3) of the

H
                               .
                1989 Rules or rresponding rules framed by the
   ABHAY SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH                         115
               [GS. SINGHVI, J.)
             State Governments and the Administration of Union          A
             Territories.

       7.    The Chief Secretaries of all the States and the
             Administrators of Union Territories shall cause. a
             notice published in the newspapers having wide
                                                                        B
             circulation in their respective States and the Union
             Territories incorporating the directions contained in
             this order.                                                    /


              In the note submitted by the learned Solicitor
              General, it has been mentioned that Clause 51 of          c
              the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill, 2012 contains
            .
              a provision for imposition of enhanced penalty. That
              amendment is not shown to have been carried out
                                                                   .
              so far. We hope and trust that the Legislature will
              make appropriate amendment and make provision             D
              for imposition of adequate penalty which may
              operate as deterrent against misuse of the
              provisions of the 1989 Act and the 1989 Rules
              generally and the provisions of Rules 108 and 119
              in particular. The State Governments and the              E
              Administration of the Union Terrilories shall either
              amend the existing rules or frame appropriate rules
              for imposing deterrent penalty on the violators of the
              rules containing prohibition against the use of red
              lights and multi-toned horns or similar devices.          F
Kalpana K. Tripathy                                Directions issued.