PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION
 
 PIL. GALLERY
 
 MEDIA GALLERY
 
 RTI. GALLERY


 
  MANAGING TRUSTEE PROFILE
 
 FUND THE CITIZEN WELFARE INITIATIVE
 
 CONTACT US
 
 LETTER GALLERY
 
 CONTACT US
 
 RTI. GALLERY

 

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for our Email Newsletter
For Email Marketing you can trust



 

OBVIOUSLY ASKED QUESTIONS
BLACK FILMS MATTER (265 OF 2011) !!

Q – 1] BLACK FILMS REDUCE HEAT RETENTION IN VEHICLES ??

ANS – 1] CONTENTIONS MAY BE RAISED THAT BLACK FILMS IN VEHICLES REDUCES HEAT RETENTION IN THE VEHICLES. IT IS SUBMITTED MOST HUMBLY THAT CUSTOMARILY THE OCCUPANTS OF VEHICLES WITH BLACK FILMS ON GLASSES SWITCH ON THE AIR CONDITIONING OF THEIR VEHICLES, WHEN THEY PULL UP THE WINDOW GLASSES, WHICH NEUTRALIZES THE EFFECTS OF HARSH WEATHER CONDITIONS. ABSENCE OF BLACK FILM, WILL ONLY DELAY THE EFFECTIVE COOLING BY ONE OR TWO MINUTES BUT WILL SAVE LIFE AND LIBERTY OF HUMAN BEINGS. AS FAR AS PRIVACY ON ROADS IS CONCERNED, IT IS FURTHER HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT NATIONAL SECURITY AND PERILS PERTAINING TO LIFE AND SECURITY OF THE CITIZENS OF THE NATIONS OWES MANIFOLD ADDED CONCERN THAN THE TRIVIAL ISSUES OF PRIVACY AND MEASURES FOR LIFE AND SECURITY HAS TO PREVAIL OVER PRIVACY.
THE COOLING IS BECAUSE OF THE AIR CONDITIONER AND NOT BECAUSE OF BLACK FILMS ON GLASSES OF VEHICLES !!




Q – 2] HOW DOES LOW ALLOCATION OF POLICE AGAINST POPULATION IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE, SUPPORT THE DEMAND FOR BAN ON TINTED GLASSES ??

ANS – 2] ANY RESOURCE SHOULD BE EFFECTIVELY USED AND MORE IMPORTANTLY WHEN IT IS SCARCE. THE POLICE APPARATUS INSTEAD OF NEEDING TO CHECK EVERY VEHICLE BY LOWERING THE GLASS OR BY OPENING THE DOOR (AN ACTIVITY WHICH WILL REQUIRE MORE PERSONNEL THAN IF 100% VLT. WAS THERE) CAN MONITOR EFFECTIVELY THROUGH SEE THROUGH GLASSES.

DUE TO 100% VLT. THERE WILL AN OVERALL DROP IN THE CRIME GRAPH AND THE SCARCE RESOURCE OF POLICE CAN BE DEPLOYED TO HIGHER PRIORITY DUTIES.

AS PER DCP. AMBATTUR DIST. – CHENNAI, EVERY VEHICLE WITH TINTED GLASS SHOULD BE CHECKED THOROUGHLY BY LOWERING THE GLASSES OF THE VEHICLES OR BY OPENING THE DOOR OF SUCH VEHICLES.



Q – 3] DID YOU COMMUNICATE (RTI.) WITH HOME MINISTRY & WHAT WAS THE REPLY ??

ANS – 3] THE HOME MINISTRY EXTENDED REPLIES DATED 7TH/15TH/ 16TH – DECEMBER, 2010 & EXPRESSED ITS INABILITY TO ANSWER OUR QUERIES & TRANSFERRED THEM TO STATES.



Q – 4] WHAT IS RULE 100 OF MOTOR VEHILCES RULE 1989 ??

ANS – 4] RULE 100 OF THE CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES RULES, 1989 (HEREINAFTER "RULES" OR "CMVR")
THE RULES SHALL BE READ AS FOLLOWS:
100. SAFETY GLASS.—(1) THE GLASS OF WINDSCREENS AND THE WINDOWS OF EVERY MOTOR VEHICLE [OTHER THAN AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS] SHALL BE OF SAFETY GLASS:
PROVIDED THAT IN THE CASE OF THREE-WHEELERS AND VEHICLES WITH HOOD AND SIDE COVERS, THE WINDOWS MAY BE OF [ACRYLIC OR PLASTIC TRANSPARENT SHEET.]
EXPLANATION.—FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS RULE,—
(I) "SAFETY GLASS" MEANS GLASS [CONFORMING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS OR ANY INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS [* * *]] AND SO MANUFACTURED OR TREATED THAT IF FRACTURED, IT DOES NOT FLY OR BREAK INTO FRAGMENTS CAPABLE OF CAUSING SEVERE CUTS;
(II) ANY WINDSCREEN OR WINDOW AT THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE, THE INNER SURFACE OF WHICH IS AT AN ANGLE [MORE THAN THIRTY DEGREES] TO THE LONGITUDINAL AXIS OF THE VEHICLE SHALL BE DEEMED TO FACE TO THE FRONT.
[(2) THE GLASS OF THE WINDSCREEN AND REAR WINDOW OF EVERY MOTOR VEHICLE SHALL BE SUCH AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN SUCH A CONDITION THAT THE VISUAL TRANSMISSION OF LIGHT IS NOT LESS THAN 70%. THE GLASSES USED FOR SIDE WINDOWS ARE SUCH AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN SUCH CONDITION THAT THE VISUAL TRANSMISSION OF LIGHT IS NOT LESS THAN 50%, AND SHALL CONFORM TO INDIAN STANDARDS [IS: 2553— PART 2—1992];
[(3) THE GLASS OF THE FRONT WINDSCREEN OF EVERY MOTOR VEHICLE [OTHER THAN TWO-WHEELERS AND AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS] MANUFACTURED AFTER THREE YEARS FROM THE COMING INTO FORCE OF THE CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES (AMENDMENT) RULES, 1993 SHALL BE MADE OF LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS: [PROVIDED THAT ON AND FROM THREE MONTHS AFTER THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES (AMENDMENT) RULES, 1999, THE GLASS OF THE FRONT WINDSCREEN OF EVERY MOTOR VEHICLE OTHER THAN TWO-WHEELERS AND AGRICULTURAL TRACTORS SHALL BE MADE OF LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS CONFORMING TO THE INDIAN STANDARDS IS: 2553—PART 2—1992.]
EXPLANATION.—FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE SUB-RULES "LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS" SHALL MEAN TWO OR MORE PIECES OF GLASS HELD TOGETHER BY AN INTERVENING LAYER OR LAYERS OF PLASTIC MATERIALS. THE LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS WILL CRACK AND BREAK UNDER SUFFICIENT IMPACT, BUT THE PIECES OF THE GLASS TEND TO ADHERE TO THE PLASTIC MATERIAL AND DO NOT FLY, AND IF A HOLE IS PRODUCED, THE EDGES WOULD BE LESS JAGGED THAN THEY WOULD BE IN THE CASE OF AN ORDINARY GLASS. THE GLASS OF THE FRONT WINDSCREEN OF A CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT VEHICLE MANUFACTURED AFTER 3 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF THE CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES (SIXTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 2000 SHALL BE MADE OF LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS.]
(4) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THIS RULE IF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IS OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS NECESSARY AND EXPEDIENT TO DO SO IN PUBLIC INTEREST, IT MAY, BY ORDER PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE, EXEMPT 198[ANY MOTOR VEHICLE INCLUDING CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT VEHICLE] FOR USE BY ANY PERSON, FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THIS RULE.]

AT PRESENT RULE 100 OF THE RULES NECESSITATES THAT EVERY VEHICLE OUGHT TO HAVE A PROTECTION GLASS THAT IS CONFORMING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS AND THE GLASS WHICH IS ON THE FRONT WINDSCREEN AND THE REAR WINDOW OF A VEHICLE, IS EXPECTED TO HAVE VISUAL TRANSMISSION OF LIGHT NOT LESS THAN 70%, WHILE THE GLASS OF SIDE WINDOWS IS TO HAVE NOT LESS THAN 50% TRANSPARENCY CONFORMING TO THE INDIAN STANDARDS. THE FRONT SCREEN IS EXPECTED TO BE OF LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS. THERE IS NO PROVISION UNDER THE RULES WHICH CONSIDERS THE USE OF THE FILMS ON GLASS OF THE VEHICLE. THE GLASSES WHICH ARE NORMALLY KNOWN AS 'TINTED GLASSES' CANNOT BE CALLED 'TINTED GLASSES' BY VIRTUE OF USE OF FILMS BUT THE MANUFACTURER HAVE TO PRODUCE SUCH GLASSES.



Q – 5] WHAT WAS THE DELHI HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON BLACK FILMS MATTER ??

ANS – 5] DELHI HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT:

COURT ON ITS MOTION VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 139(2007) DLT244
THAT IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 2006, THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI, ON ITS OWN MOTION, ISSUED NOTICES TO THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS IN VIEW OF THE DETERIORATING TRAFFIC SCENARIO IN DELHI. THE JUDGMENT IN THIS CASE CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.16565 OF 2006 WAS DELIVERED BY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SWTANTER KUMAR (NOW HON'BLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA), FOR THE BENCH COMPRISING OF JUSTICE KUMAR AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. MALHOTRA IN MARCH 2007. AT THE SAME TIME AS OBSERVING THIS RULE, THE COURT ARRIVED AT A CONCLUSION THAT SAFETY GLASS WHICH HAS BEEN TINTED BY APPLICATION OF 'FILMS' IS NOT CONTEMPLATED BY THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT OR THE RULES HEREUNDER. AMONGST OTHERS, THIS JUDGMENT DEALT WITH BLACK FILMS ON CAR WINDOW PANES AS WELL. THE COURT OBSERVED THAT "…USING OF BLACK FILMS WHICH COMPLETELY STOP OR SUBSTANTIALLY OBSTRUCT VISIBILITY INSIDE THE CARS, ARE A FEW AMONGST MANY OF THE COMMONLY COMMITTED TRAFFIC OFFENCES" (PARA 7). THUS, IT CAN BE CONSTRUED FROM THE AFOREMENTIONED THAT THE COURT CONSIDERED THE USE OF BLACK FILMS TO OBSTRUCT THE VISIBILITY AS AN OFFENCE.
THE RELEVANT PORTIONS FROM THE SAID JUDGEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS:
8. RULE 100 OF THE RULES REQUIRES THAT EVERY VEHICLE HAS TO HAVE A SAFETY GLASS THAT IS CONFORMING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS OR ANY OTHER INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND THE GLASS WHICH IS ON THE FRONT WINDSCREEN AND THE REAR WINDOW OF A VEHICLE, IS EXPECTED TO HAVE VISUAL TRANSMISSION OF LIGHT NOT LESS THAN 70%, WHILE THE GLASS OF SIDE WINDOWS IS TO HAVE NOT LESS THAN 50% TRANSPARENCY CONFORMING TO THE INDIAN STANDARDS. THE FRONT SCREEN IS EXPECTED TO BE OF LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS. THERE IS NO PROVISION UNDER THE ACT OR THE RULES WHICH CONTEMPLATES THE USE OF THE FILMS ON GLASS OF THE VEHICLE. THE GLASSES WHICH ARE NORMALLY KNOWN AS 'TINTED GLASSES' CANNOT BE CALLED 'TINTED GLASSES' BY VIRTUE OF USE OF FILMS BUT THE MANUFACTURER HAVE TO PRODUCE SUCH GLASSES. THE MANUFACTURERS ARE PRODUCING CARS WITH 'TINTED GLASSES', WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO PASS THE TEST/INSPECTION BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS ARE REQUIRED TO GET CLEARANCE FROM THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEES CONSTITUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, USE OF BLACK FILMS IS PROHIBITED BY LAW AND WHAT IS IMPERMISSIBLE TO BE ACHIEVED DIRECTLY, CANNOT BE STRICTLY ENFORCE THIS CONDITION.
9. BESIDES THAT IT OFFENDS THE LAW, USE OF BLACK FILMS HAS A VERY SERIOUS AND DANGEROUS CONSEQUENCE EVEN IN THE FIELD OF CRIME. IT IS A COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT THE CARS OR VEHICLES INVOLVED IN COMMISSION OF HEINOUS CRIMES LIKE KIDNAPPING, ABDUCTING, RAPE AND OTHER SERIOUS OFFENCES, NORMALLY CARRY JET BLACK FILMS, THUS, TOTALLY PREVENTING THE OFFENDERS FROM BEING SEEN/IDENTIFIED BY ANY PERSON ON THE ROAD.
10. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE VARIOUS AUTHORITIES ACCEPTED THIS POSITION. WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF DELHI POLICE, INCHARGE OF TRAFFIC, WHO APPEARED IN THE COURT, FAIRLY STATED THAT MAJORITY OF THE CARS/VEHICLES INVOLVED IN COMMISSION OF CRIMES USE THE BLACK FILMS THROUGH WHICH IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE INSIDE THE CARS EVEN FROM A VERY CLOSE DISTANCE. LACK OF WILL TO ENFORCE THIS CONDITION HAS RESULTED IN SERIOUS PREJUDICE TO ALL CONCERNED THOUGH IT MIGHT HAVE PROVED AS A BOON FOR THE CRIMINALS.
11. ANOTHER ASPECT OF THIS TRAFFIC OFFENCE IS THAT THE AUTHORITIES ARE REQUIRED TO ALLOW USE OF BLACK FILMS FOR SECURITY REASONS, PARTICULARLY IN RELATION TO THE PERSONS TO WHOM HIGH SECURITY IS PROVIDED FOR THEIR PROTECTION. THIS OBVIOUSLY BEING RESTRICTED TO A VERY LIMITED CLASS OF SOCIETY, CANNOT, THEREFORE, BE PERMITTED TO DEFEAT THE LAW AS WELL AS ENDANGER THE LIFE OF A COMMON MAN, PARTICULARLY THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN. DUE PROVISIONS NEED TO BE MADE/AMENDED AND WE HEREBY CONSTITUTE A SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF WHICH HOME SECRETARY, DELHI, ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (SECURITY) AND ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER POLICE (TRAFFIC), SHALL BE THE MEMBERS. THIS SPECIAL COMMITTEE SHALL EXAMINE THE PERCEPTION OF THREAT OF SECURITY TO ANY PERSON, WHO APPLIES TO THE COMMITTEE FOR GRANT OF PERMISSION TO USE BLACK FILMS ON THE CAR. WE DO HOPE THAT THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE SHALL USE ITS DISCRETION DISCREETLY AND IN GENUINE CASES. THE COMMITTEE SHALL ISSUE A CERTIFICATE UNDER ITS SEAL, WHICH SHALL BE KEPT IN THE OFFICIAL CAR OF THE PERSON TO WHOM SUCH PERMISSION IS GRANTED. NO VEHICLE, TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY BELONG, WOULD HAVE THE BLACK FILMS ON THE GLASS/SCREEN OF THE CAR, UNLESS IT HAS SPECIFIC PERMISSION OF THE CONCERNED AUTHORITY, BEARING THE CAR NUMBER AS WELL. ALL OTHER CARS/VEHICLES ARE HEREBY PROHIBITED FROM USING THE BLACK FILMS OF ANY TRANSPARENCY ON THEIR CARS. WE MAY ALSO REFER THAT SIMILAR ORDERS WERE PASSED BY DIFFERENT COURTS IN THE COUNTRY AND THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS VS. NAMIT KUMAR AND ORS. AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 1386 HAS UPHELD SUCH AN ORDER AND DIRECTED AS UNDER. ONE OTHER DIRECTION WHICH HAS BEEN ASSAILED RELATES TO THE USE OF BLACK FILMS ON THE GLASSES. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES RULES, 1989 (IN SHORT 'CENTRAL RULES') PROVIDE FOR THE MEASURE TO BE TAKEN IN SUCH CASES ACHIEVED INDIRECTLY. THE AUTHORITIES AND THE TRAFFIC POLICE ARE REQUIRED TO STRICTLY ENFORCE THIS CONDITION.
WE, THEREFORE, MODIFY THE DIRECTION OF THE HIGH COURT TO THE EXTENT THAT WHILE CARRYING OUT THE DIRECTIONS, THE MANDATE OF SUB-RULE (2) OF RULE 100 SHALL BE KEPT IN VIEW. THIS SHALL BE IN ADDITION TO ANY SECURITY REQUIREMENT AS MAY BE LAID DOWN BY THE LAW AND ORDER ENFORCING AGENCIES.
12. THUS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THIS DIRECTION NEEDS TO BE ENFORCED VIGOUROUSLY BY THE ENFORCING AGENCIES. WE FIND THAT SUB-RULE (20 OF RULE 100 OF THE SAID RULES DEALS WITH THE ISSUE.

THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT, HOWEVER FINALLY WENT ON TO DIRECT THAT NO VEHICLE SHALL HAVE BLACK FILM ON ITS WINDOW/SCREEN:
"14.NO VEHICLE TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY BELONG WOULD HAVE THE BLACK FILMS ON THE GLASS/SCREEN OF THE CAR, UNLESS IT HAS SPECIFIC PERMISSION OF THE CONCERNED AUTHORITY, BEARING THE CAR NUMBER AS WELL."


THE JUDGMENT WAS SUBJECTED TO REVIEW IN CM NO. 9754 OF 2007 AND CM NO. 13271 OF 2007 INSTITUTED BY CAR FILMS' DEALER AND MANUFACTURER RESPECTIVELY. THE JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY A BENCH COMPRISING OF JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR (NOW HON'BLE JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) AND JUSTICE H.R. MALHOTRA OBSERVED THAT THE JUDGMENT UNDER REVIEW SUFFERED FROM AN ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD, HOLDING AS FOLLOWS:

THE REQUIREMENT, PRECISELY SPEAKING, IS THAT THE GLASS OF THE WINDSCREEN MUST NOT HAVE A VISUAL TRANSMISSION OF LIGHT LESS THAN 70% ON THE FRONT AND THE REAR WINDSCREEN AND 50% ON THE SIDE WINDOWS. THE RULE DOES NOT FORBID MANUFACTURE OR USE OF GLASS WITH A HIGHER VISUAL TRANSMISSION THAN THE MINIMUM PRESCRIBED, NOR DOES THE RULE FORBID USE OF FILMS ON THE WINDSCREENS AND SIDE WINDOWS, SO LONG AS THE SAME DO NOT REDUCE THE VISUAL TRANSMISSION BELOW THE MINIMUM PRESCRIBED BY THE RULE. THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THIS COURT FORBIDDING THE USE OF BLACK FILMS OF 'ANY TRANSPARENCY', THEREFORE, APPEARS TO US TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE STATUTORY PROVISION MADE BY RULE 100(2) OF THE CENTRAL MOTOR VEHICLES RULES, 1989 (SUPRA). THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN DRAWN TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID RULE FOR OTHERWISE THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR THE COURT TO ISSUE A DIRECTION CONTRARY TO THE SAME IN A PUBLIC INTEREST PETITION.