Justice Devan Ramachandran made the observation while considering the petition dealing with poor road conditions in the State.

During the proceedings, the amici curiae, Vinod Bhat and Krishna, drew the Court's attention to several problems concerning footpaths and street lighting at different locations in Kochi.

The amici curiae also brought to the Court's notice its earlier orders dated July 29, 2025 and August 14, 2025, concerning measures to be taken by the police to curb reckless and dangerous traffic, particularly involving heavy vehicles.

It was submitted that the concerned authorities did not appear to be implementing the measures assured before the Court.

The Standing Counsel for the Kochi Corporation requested two weeks' time to address the concerns relating to footpaths and street lighting and assured the Court that the specific issues pointed out by the amici curiae would be examined.

The Government Pleader informed the Court that a report had been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police which stated that drives to control traffic in the city, particularly heavy-vehicle traffic, would be undertaken.

The Government Pleader further submitted that the police report contemplated verification of drivers and employees of private buses, including obtaining character certificates. With regard to the incident brought to the Court's notice by the amici curiae, he submitted that the person allegedly involved had been taken into custody.

The Court, however, stressed that road safety could not remain confined to assurances or reports filed before it.

“We are living at times, when the right to use roads and pedestrian paths are fundamental in nature and hence road safety becomes an inviolable imperative,” the Court observed.

The Court noted that once the competent police authority had informed it through its report that steps would be taken to make the roads safe, it was incumbent upon the authorities to ensure that those measures were implemented in letter and spirit.

The amici curiae, however, submitted that there had been no tangible improvement in the situation, particularly with respect to reckless driving and violations of road regulations.

Referring to the responsibilities of different categories of road users, the Court observed that road safety principles apply from the smallest vehicle to the largest. Heavy vehicles and private buses, therefore, have a particular responsibility to operate carefully and ensure that other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and two-wheeler riders are not exposed to harm.

“It is internationally recognised that precedents on roads travel from the smallest vehicle to the largest; in that context it is unnecessary to say that heavy vehicles and private buses are to conduct themselves very carefully ensuring that the other users including pedestrians, cyclists, two wheelers etc are in any manner put to harm.” Court said.

The amici curiae submitted that the ground situation was far from satisfactory and that road users were being forced to remain defensive to avoid being hit or injured by vehicles allegedly being driven recklessly.

The Government Pleader, in response, submitted that the issues raised by the amici curiae, as well as the police report, would be considered by the competent police authority in consultation with officers of the Motor Vehicles Department, with a view to making the roads safer.

The Court expressed its unhappiness that, despite the assurances and measures earlier recorded in its orders, road safety continued to not receive the importance it deserved, particularly at zebra crossings, pedestrian areas and locations witnessing high population density.

The matter was accordingly adjourned.

The Kochi Corporation was directed to respond to the specific concerns raised by the amici curiae regarding footpaths and street lighting. The Commissioner of Police, Kochi, was directed to consider the aspects relating to road safety and file a report before the Court detailing the steps already taken, the measures being continued and further measures proposed to be implemented.

Case Title - C P Ajithkumar v State of Kerala

Case No - WP(C) 32680/ 2008

Counsel for Petitioner - Tom K. Thomas

Amici Curie: S. Krishna, S. Vinod Bhat, P. Deepak