Why are uninsured vehicles not part of crash relief scheme? Supreme Court

The Compensation to Victims (Interim Relief) Scheme, 2026 is a proposed government arrangement for immediate financial help after serious road crashes. It is meant to support families of people who die and people who suffer grievous injuries. The payment comes before a final compensation decision.

For example, a family could apply after an insured vehicle causes a fatal crash. A victim with a grievous injury could also apply. Clause 6 says victims or legal heirs can use a designated online portal. They must provide details of claims filed or pending before a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, or MACT.

The scheme has not yet been notified or publicised, according to the Supreme Court’s observation. The court directed the government to publicise it so people know they can seek interim compensation. The government said the road transport ministry shared it with states and Union Territories on February 23. Officials said it will be notified under the Central Motor Vehicle Act.

The scheme sets interim relief at Rs 2 lakh when a road crash causes death. It provides Rs 1 lakh when a person suffers a grievous injury. These amounts are designed to give immediate support before a tribunal decides the final claim.

For example, the legal heirs of a deceased crash victim may apply for Rs 2 lakh through the designated online portal. A seriously injured victim may apply for Rs 1 lakh. The application requires details of any claim filed or pending before a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The payment is therefore interim, not the final award.

Officials explained that Section 164 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides Rs 5 lakh for death and Rs 2.5 lakh for grievous injury under no-fault liability. The scheme’s smaller amounts are intended as immediate relief. Final compensation may be higher, depending on the MACT’s order.

The Supreme Court questioned the scheme’s insured-vehicle limit because road-crash victims may also be harmed by uninsured vehicles. Excluding those victims could leave them without the same immediate financial support. The court therefore sought an explanation from the government about the policy choice.

Officials said the scheme was framed under provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act that deal with insured vehicles. Under the proposed process, victims or legal heirs apply online and provide details of claims filed or pending before a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. That structure links the interim payment to the insurance-related provisions used to frame the scheme.

The government has not announced an expansion in the article. Instead, officials said cases involving uninsured vehicles will go to a MACT. The Supreme Court also noted that the scheme had not been notified or publicised, and directed the government to make people aware of their right to seek interim relief.

When the offending vehicle is uninsured, the proposed interim-relief scheme does not currently provide the same direct payment. The case must instead be taken to a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, or MACT. This creates a different route from the scheme’s online interim-relief process for insured vehicles.

For example, if an uninsured vehicle causes a grievous injury, the victim cannot rely on the scheme’s Rs 1 lakh payment under the framework described. The victim’s matter goes before a MACT. The tribunal then considers the claim and decides the compensation order. The article does not describe a separate immediate payment for uninsured cases.

The Supreme Court questioned this distinction and asked the government to explain why uninsured vehicles were excluded. Officials said the scheme was framed under Motor Vehicles Act provisions dealing with insured vehicles. Whether the framework changes was not stated. The government must also notify and publicise the scheme.

A Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, commonly called a MACT, is a legal forum that handles compensation claims arising from road crashes. It matters because the tribunal’s decision determines the final amount payable, rather than the scheme’s temporary payment alone. The article identifies MACT as the route for uninsured-vehicle cases.

For example, a victim may have a claim filed or pending before a MACT while applying through the scheme’s designated portal. The tribunal reviews the claim and issues an order on compensation. In general, it considers evidence about the crash, the death or injury, financial loss, and the parties responsible. The article does not list every factor used in its assessment.

The scheme provides Rs 2 lakh for death and Rs 1 lakh for grievous injury as immediate relief. Officials said final compensation would be higher depending on the MACT order. Uninsured-vehicle matters go directly to this tribunal under the described framework.

“No-fault liability” means a claimant does not have to prove that the vehicle owner acted wrongfully, negligently, or by default. This matters because proving how a crash happened can be difficult and slow. The rule focuses on the death or grievous injury and the statutory payment.

Under Section 164, the article says the vehicle owner or insurer must pay Rs 5 lakh for death and Rs 2.5 lakh for serious injury. A claimant need not establish that the death or injury resulted from wrongful act, neglect, or default by the owner. The proposed scheme offers smaller amounts first: Rs 2 lakh for death and Rs 1 lakh for serious injury.

This arrangement gives victims quicker access to money while the broader claim continues. The interim amount is not necessarily the final award. Officials said final compensation would be higher, depending on the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal’s order.

Vehicle insurance is required by law, especially third-party cover, so people injured by a vehicle have a potential source of compensation. It matters because crash losses can be sudden and large. Insurance also helps ensure that the vehicle owner does not bear every payment alone.

For example, when an insured vehicle causes a death, the insurer may pay compensation under the legal framework. The article says Section 164 places payment responsibility on the vehicle owner or insurer, without requiring proof of wrongful act, neglect, or default. The scheme then offers immediate relief of Rs 2 lakh for death and Rs 1 lakh for grievous injury.

Insurance spreads financial risk through premiums collected from many policyholders and payments made for covered claims. The article specifically discusses insured vehicles, while uninsured cases go to a MACT. The Supreme Court questioned whether uninsured victims should also receive interim support.