Hit-And-Run Cases Often Put On Back Burner Unless They Draw Media Attention: Kerala High Court Directs Formation Of Special Squads

Justice G. Girish issued the directions while disposing of three writ petitions arising from separate hit-and-run incidents in which the offending vehicles remained untraced despite prolonged police investigations.

Opening the judgment with a stark commentary on the growing normalisation of road accidents, the Court observed that while fatal accidents have become routine, hit-and-run cases continue to receive inadequate attention from law enforcement agencies, legal practitioners and, to some extent, even courts.

“Nowadays news reports about road accidents seldom catch the attention of newspaper readers. A stage has reached where the general public consider motor vehicle accidents, leading to casualties, the order of the day. Right from the occurrence, things will move on as a routine course with the injured or the dependents of those who lost life ultimately getting a claim award from the MACT after several years. Among the scores of road accidents occurring every day, there is a rare category of cases which are not given proper attention by the law enforcers, legal practitioners, and even to a certain extent, by Courts,” the Court observed.

The Court noted that victims of such accidents often bear the burden of treatment expenses, loss of earnings and permanent disabilities because of the ineffective implementation of the Compensation to Victims of Hit and Run Motor Accidents Scheme, 2021, framed under Section 161 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Highlighting the challenges in tracing offending vehicles, the Court observed that success in hit-and-run investigations depends on swift and coordinated action by police units across districts, coupled with the prompt deployment of modern telecommunications and forensic technologies.

“The need to put into service the latest technologies in telecommunication and forensic science at the earliest opportunity, is also an aspect which is of paramount importance to achieve a breakthrough in the investigation of hit and run cases. Such timely steps to track and apprehend the rogue vehicles fleeing from the spot after hitting down a pedestrian or the traveller of another vehicle, could be put into practice only if a mechanism is arranged for meeting such exigencies,” the Court observed.

The Court further remarked that, barring cases that become sensational because of media intervention, police authorities often place such investigations on the back burner when tracing the offender and the vehicle proves difficult.

It also cautioned that certain hit-and-run incidents could, in fact, be deliberate attempts to endanger life and may amount to offences such as murder, culpable homicide or attempt to murder, making effective investigation essential to the administration of criminal justice.

The Court found the Compensation to Victims of Hit and Run Motor Accidents Scheme, 2021 to be inadequate and ineffective, and noted that the Supreme Court, in Rajaseekaran S. v. Union of India [AIR 2024 SC 583], had already issued several directions to improve its implementation.

The Court further noted that the Supreme Court had directed the Central Government to consider gradually enhancing the compensation amounts prescribed under Section 161 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

“It appears that no such decision has so far been taken by the Central Government in compliance with the aforesaid direction,” the Court observed.

Calling for immediate intervention, the Court said:

“It is high time that the Central Government should wake up from slumberness and take appropriate steps, which would provide solace to hundreds of victims of hit and run accident cases who, for no fault of theirs, are deprived of the reliefs as in the case of an accident where the offending vehicle is detected. The inability of the State machinery to find out ways and means to provide compensation to the victims of hit and run motor accidents on par with the compensation which the victims of other accidents receive from Claims Tribunals would amount to nothing short of injustice and impertinence to the sufferings of a section of accident victims.”

The Court then examined compensation mechanisms in Australia and England.

Referring to Australia's Motor Accident Injuries Act, 2019, the Court noted that the legislation envisages an Australian Capital Territory Insurance Authority functioning as a “nominal defendant” to compensate victims of accidents involving unidentified, uninsured and unregistered vehicles through a dedicated fund.

The Court also referred to the United Kingdom's Motor Insurers' Bureau, which is funded through compulsory contributions from insurers and compensates victims of accidents caused by uninsured or untraced drivers.

Observing that India could adopt similar mechanisms, the Court suggested the creation of a statutory authority supported by funds generated through penalties, insurance contributions, registration fees, permit charges and other revenue streams.

“In our country, the Central Government could also think of making amendments to the penal provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to deduct an amount from the fines imposed, for mobilising the funds required for the payment of compensation under the Scheme. So also, appropriate provisions for the levy of cess from registration fee, permit fee, licence fee, insurance premium, etc., could be looked into to find sources for constituting funds for the payment of compensation under the Scheme,” the Court observed.

Accordingly, the Court directed the State Police Chief to constitute Special Squads in every district under the supervision of District Police Chiefs to coordinate efforts to trace offenders and offending vehicles in hit-and-run cases. The Court also directed that cyber police personnel extend top priority to requests made by these squads and that public awareness campaigns be undertaken to publicise their functioning and contact details.

In all three cases before it, the Court ordered that the investigations be handed over to District Crime Branch teams headed by officers not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.

The Registry was directed to forward copies of the judgment to the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, and to the Chief Secretary and State Police Chief of Kerala for urgent action.

Case Title: Geetha v State Police Chief and connected matters

Case No: WP(Crl.) 15/ 2026 and connected matters

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 385

Counsel for Petitioner: M.R. Sarin, Vivek Venugopal, Santhish Peter (Mamalayil), P.N. Anoop, M.S. Sandeep Sudhakaran, Nadeem Nazar, Nissi V. Rajesh

Counsel for Respondents: Sameer. S (PP)