Supreme Court's Article 142 Power and Road Safety as a Fundamental Right
Two major road accidents in November 2025 — one in Phalodi district, Rajasthan (killing 15 people on the Bharatmala Expressway) and one in Rangareddy district, Telangana (killing 19 people including a 40-day-old infant) — claimed a total of 34 lives within 48 hours.
The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the accidents, framing the case as In Re: Phalodi Accident v. National Highways Authority of India (2026 INSC 388).
A division bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar declared that commuter safety on highways is an integral facet of the right to live with dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court issued nationwide interim directions against NHAI and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) under Article 142 of the Constitution, covering illegal encroachments, blackspot rectification, truck lay-byes, emergency response systems, and highway inspection timelines.
Article 142: Power to Do Complete Justice
Article 142 of the Constitution confers on the Supreme Court a unique power: it may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing "complete justice" in any cause or matter pending before it. The orders made under Article 142 are binding and enforceable throughout the territory of India, by all authorities and tribunals.
The interim directions in the road safety case — which cover NHAI, MoRTH, state authorities, and multiple other agencies simultaneously — were issued under Article 142 because no single statute comprehensively addresses all dimensions of highway safety management.
Suo Motu Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court can take cognizance of a matter on its own motion — termed suo motu (Latin: "of its own accord") — even without a formal petition. This power flows from the Court's inherent jurisdiction as the guardian of fundamental rights under Article 32, and from Article 142.
The 34 deaths in two days, on national highways managed by NHAI, provided the factual trigger for the Court to step in directly rather than wait for a petition — using suo motu cognizance to act as an institutional catalyst.
Article 21: Right to Life and the Road Safety Dimension
Article 21 guarantees that "no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." The Supreme Court has, over decades, expanded Article 21 to include not just protection from arbitrary state action but affirmative obligations on the state to protect life and dignity.
By framing highway safety as a constitutional obligation under Article 21, the Court removed "lack of funds" and "administrative constraints" as valid defences for NHAI and state governments.
National Highways Authority of India (NHAI)
NHAI is the statutory body responsible for the development, maintenance, and management of national highways in India. It was established under the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988, and functions under the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH).
The Phalodi accident occurred on the Bharatmala Expressway — a newly built national highway — raising systemic questions about design standards, safety audits, and post-construction maintenance.
- Two accidents: Phalodi, Rajasthan (15 deaths) + Rangareddy, Telangana (19 deaths including infant) = 34 deaths total
- Date of accidents: November 2025
- Case citation: In Re: Phalodi Accident v. NHAI, 2026 INSC 388
- Bench: Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
- Constitutional provisions: Article 21 (right to life), Article 142 (complete justice)
- Respondents: NHAI, MoRTH, state governments
- India's annual road accident deaths: ~1.5 lakh (among highest globally)
- National highway network length: ~1,46,000 km
- Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act year: 2019
- NHAI established under: National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988