LMV licence holders can drive transport vehicles weighing under 7,500 kg: Supreme Court

Answering a reference made to it, the bench, which also comprised Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Justice P S Narasimha, Justice Pankaj Mithal, and Justice Manoj Misra, said, “According to our understanding, the correct way to view the legal implication would be that ‘transport vehicles’ mentioned in Section 10 would cover only those vehicles whose gross vehicle weight is above 7,500 kg. Such an interpretation aligns with the broader purpose of the amendments and ensures that the licensing regime remains efficient and practical for vehicle owners and drivers.”

The court referred to the definition of ‘motor vehicle’ in Section 2(28) of the MV Act and said, “It is a clear signal that the legislature did not wish to maintain a distinction between the two classes of vehicles. Such an explicit and specific definition leaves no room for ambiguity. Considering the emphatic nature of the definition given in Section 2(21), which would suggest a strict interpretation, it would be logical to conclude that a light motor vehicle would mean a transport vehicle, omnibus, road roller, tractor, or motor car, provided the weight does not exceed 7,500 kg.”

The issue has its genesis in disputes regarding payment of claims by insurance companies for accidents involving “transport vehicles” operated by those holding licences to drive light motor vehicles.

In 2017, a three-judge Supreme Court bench in the Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. case concluded that the holder of a licence for a light motor vehicle class need not have a separate endorsement to drive a transport vehicle if it falls under the ‘light motor vehicle’ class below 7,500 kg.

Challenging this, insurance companies raised concerns regarding road safety and argued that if the law as laid down in Mukund Dewangan is not interfered with, unfit drivers will start plying transport vehicles, putting at risk the lives of thousands of people.

However, the court noted that “no empirical data has been produced before us to show that road accidents in India have increased as a direct result of drivers with LMV licence plying a transport vehicle of LMV class” whose gross weight is under 7,500 kg.

It said, “Road safety is indeed an important objective of the MV Act but our reasoning must not be founded on unverified assumptions without any empirical data. The dangers of reasoning without empirical data and beyond the statutory scheme of the Act must be avoided. While we are mindful of issues of road safety, the task of crafting policy lies within the domain of the legislature. As a constitutional court, it is not our role to dictate policy decisions or rewrite laws. We must be mindful of the institutional limitation to address such concerns.”

‘Licensing regime cannot remain static’

The bench added that road safety is a serious public health issue globally. and it is crucial to mention that in India, over 1.7 lakh persons were killed in road accidents in 2023. It said the causes of such accidents are diverse, and assumptions that they stem from drivers operating light transport vehicles with an LMV licence are unsubstantiated.

“Factors contributing to road accidents include careless driving, speeding, poor road design, and failure to adhere to traffic laws. Other significant contributors are mobile phone usage, fatigue, and non-compliance with seat belt or helmet regulations,” the court noted.

Writing for the bench, Justice Hrishikesh Roy said, “In an era where autonomous or driverless vehicles are no longer tales of science fiction and app-based passenger platforms are a modern reality, the licensing regime cannot remain static.”

It noted that the amendments carried out by the Parliament to the MV Act so far “may not have dealt with all possible concerns” and referred to the statement of Attorney General R Venkataramani that a set of new amendments are on the way. The bench expressed the “hope that a comprehensive amendment to address the statutory lacunae will be made with necessary corrective measures”.

The bench said, “Our present interpretation on how the licensing regime is to operate for drivers under the statutory scheme is unlikely to compromise the road safety concerns. This will also effectively address the livelihood issues for drivers operating transport vehicles (who clock maximum hours behind the wheels), in legally operating “transport vehicles” (below 7,500 kg), with their LMV driving license.”