Perceived legitimacy of India’s stricter hit-and-run law
Ramphul Ohlan, Anshu OhlanPurpose
In response to a high rate of hit-and-run road traffic incidents, India’s recent legislative reforms have introduced stricter penalties to prevent these offenses, including longer prison sentences and heavier fines. This study aims to assess the public’s perception of the legitimacy of these new intensified deterrence-based measures.
Design/methodology/approach
Using an exploratory–descriptive design, face-to-face survey data were collected from 384 road users. Descriptive statistics summarized perceptions, while construct validity of perceived legitimacy was assessed using exploratory factor analysis. Group differences across road-user categories were examined using the Kruskal–Wallis H-test, and Garrett’s ranking technique was applied to prioritize perceived determinants.
Findings
The results indicate that Section 106(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 is broadly perceived as legitimate. Perceived legitimacy is shaped not merely by the severity of punishment but by assessments of fairness, proportionality and trust in enforcement. Intoxication is ranked as the most important perceived determinant of hit-and-run behaviour, followed by pedestrian involvement and the perceived inadequacy of earlier penalties. Significant differences across road-user groups – particularly among truck drivers – emerge with respect to perceived mob-lynching risk, underscoring how occupational exposure and enforcement experiences condition legal attitudes.
Social implications
Public acceptance and perceived legitimacy of the revised law may facilitate compliance and support its effective implementation. However, heterogeneous perceptions across road-user groups suggest that uniform legal provisions may generate uneven behavioural and psychological responses, highlighting the need for context-sensitive enforcement and communication strategies.
Originality/value
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is among the first to evaluate the perceived legitimacy of recent hit-and-run law reforms in a developing-country context. Beyond providing India-specific evidence, it demonstrates the analytical value of integrating deterrence, procedural fairness and trust in enforcement as a framework for evaluating new legal interventions. The findings offer broader insights into how legitimacy-based approaches can inform the design and implementation of road safety laws in high-risk and institutionally diverse settings.