Red beacons may no more be a privilege that Governments of the day can afford to provide. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court held that red beacon can only be used by high dignitaries holding Constitutional posts both at the Centre and in the States.
Giving States three months to draw a fresh list of persons under this rule, a bench of Justices GS Singhvi and C Nagappan termed such symbols to be reflective of ‘Raj mentality’ and is ‘antithesis of the concept of a Republic’ that requires public functionaries to be servants of their masses and not their rulers.
While enforcing the decision would be a challenge for the State and the Central authorities, the court asked them to consider imposing exemplary fine on violators and ensure its enforcement. The judgement clarified that the restriction will not apply to men in uniform, operational agencies who require un-hindered access to roads, those engaged in emergency duties such as ambulance, fire engines, police vehicles, escort or pilot vehicles and those engaged in law and order duties. The court, however, held they can use light of other colours but not red.
Under two notifications issued by Central Government on January 11, 2002 and July 28, 2005, use of red light with flasher is entitled to President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, Former Presidents, Deputy Prime Minister, Chief Justice of India, Speaker of lok Sabha, Cabinet Ministers of the Union, Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission, Former Prime Ministers, leaders of Opposition in lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, and Judges of Supreme Court.
Use of beacons without flashers are prescribed to CEC, CAG, Deputy Chairman Rajya Sabha, Deputy Speaker lok Sabha, Ministers of State, Members of Planning Commission, Attorney General, Cabinet Secretary, Chiefs of Staff, Deputy Ministers, Chairman CAT, Chairman Minorities Commission, Chairman SC and ST Commission and UPSC Chairman.
Corresponding posts in the States would also be entitled under the SC order. But all others enjoying the privilege will have to live without it. The use of red beacons will be permitted only while on duty and not during private visits, the bench added. The spirit of the decision was spelt out in the following words, where the bench observed, “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 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.”
Playing a major part in shaping the decision of the court was amicus curiae and senior advocate Harish Salve who described such symbols to be of the British Raj although the Centre opposed court’s intervention. The court was also of the view that police personnel got unnecessarily engaged in VIP security, when their services could effectively be utilised for law and order functions.
On Salve’s suggestion, the Court also enforced prohibition on sirens under Rule 119 of Motor Vehicles Rules 1989. Asking Chief Secretaries to enforce this prohibition within a month, the court directed the concerned State agencies to give wide publicity through newspapers. The bench said, “The red lights symbolise power and a stark differentiation between those who are allowed to use it and the ones who are not.”
It found that a large number of vehicles with red lights have no respect for the laws of the country and they treat the ordinary citizens with contempt. Noting the “abysmal” failure on part of authorities and agencies of states and UTs to curb misuse of this provision for decades, the bench felt an urgent need to intervene as such vehicles were being used to commit crime with impunity. The accused in such cases even got away as police got ‘scared’ to check vehicles with beacon, the court held.