38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, November 11, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Bombay HC Mandates Automobile Companies To Provide Two Free Helmets To Buyers Of Two Wheelers Or Vehicle Registration Will Be Denied

By LawStreet News Network      13 February, 2020 09:02 PM      0 Comments
Bombay HC Mandates Automobile Companies To Provide Two Free Helmets

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court on 12th February 2020, Wednesday warned that it would abstain from registering of vehicles in Maharashtra in future if they wouldnt comply with the norms which were earlier decided, keeping in mind the tough stand of the bench, on providing two free helmets to all the two wheeler buyers by the automobile manufacturers and dealers. 

A division bench comprising JusticeRavi Deshpande and Justice Amit Borkar has directed the government pleader Sumant Deopujari to file a compliance report on the same issue by granting six weeks to the State Government and transport commissioner in order to  intimate all manufacturers so that they strictly adhere to the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR), 1989.

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by Social Workers Saurabh Bharadwaj and Manish Singh Chauhan with reference to the grave violation of CMVR. In the proceedings of that, the bench asked the respondents to make sure that all the rules and regulations are taken seriously and strictly followed.

Mentioning the CMVR, the petitioners through their counsel Avdesh Kesari made the point of two wheeler manufacturers and dealers to be under obligation of providing two protective headgears, or in other words Helmets, to the buyers, for drivers and pillion riders, in order to conform to the specifications of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Act, 1986. Currently, only one helmet is being provided to the customers or consumers while delivering the vehicle to them.

Deopujari further added, supporting the petitioners contention, that the Government had already written a letter four years back in 2016, to all the two wheeler manufacturers to comply with CMVR and to provide two helmets to all the buyers which they didnt follow.

Before the current issue, all the 16 dealers appeared before the High Court after being summoned in the last hearing. They included Tajshree, Sudarshan, Rishikesh, Arun, Nangia, KTM, Kusumgar, Paragon, AK Gandhi, Mascot, Universal, Jaika & Unnati. All of these dealers sell various brands of two-wheelers, but even then most of them failed to file replies to the High Courts repeated directives.

One important thing to notice is that the dealers tried to pass the liability of supplying the helmets onto the automobile manufacturers and applied to add them as respondents in the concerned PIL. The judges snapped at them asking why did it take them over a year to file the replies. The court further asked the dealers the cost they would like to pay for the inordinate delay in filing replies and also warned them that they would stop the registration of all the vehicles in state but the dealers begged them to reconsider since it would lead to a lot of loss and havoc which would lead the automobile sales to come to a halt.

The petitioners requested the respondents to act against the dealers and manufacturers who arent providing helmets to customers and also prayed for the concerned directives for the state transport ministry to initiate probe against the Regional Transport Office (RTO) and file a report. They also demanded that the dealers should pay compensation to the family members of victim who died in road accidents without wearing helmets. They also insisted on cancelling the dealerships of respondents who failed in order to follow the CMVR norms.

The Union as well as the State Ministries for Road Safety and Transport along with city based Regional Transport Office (RTO) are also parties under respondents. Assistant Solicitor General Ulhas Aurangabadkar held a brief for the Union Ministry.

 

Author Devansh Dev



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

state-govt-cannot-appeal-in-cbi-prosecuted-cases-supreme-court-reaffirms-lalu-prasad-yadav-judgment
Trending Judiciary
State Govt Cannot Appeal In CBI-Prosecuted Cases: Supreme Court Reaffirms Lalu Prasad Yadav Judgment [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court reaffirms Lalu Prasad Yadav ruling, holding that State Governments cannot appeal acquittals in CBI-investigated cases.

10 November, 2025 12:28 PM
managing-director-falls-within-definition-of-employer-under-minimum-wages-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Managing Director Falls Within Definition Of ‘Employer’ Under Minimum Wages Act: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court rules that a Managing Director qualifies as an “employer” under the Minimum Wages Act, upholding liability for unpaid wages.

10 November, 2025 12:48 PM

TOP STORIES

instigation-for-suicide-need-not-be-compulsive-suggestive-words-enough-to-attract-section-306-ipc
Trending Judiciary
Instigation for Suicide Need Not Be Compulsive; Suggestive Words Enough to Attract Section 306 IPC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court rules that instigation for suicide under Section 306 IPC need not be forceful; even suggestive words implying the consequence can attract liability.

05 November, 2025 04:10 PM
public-ground-cannot-be-reserved-for-any-religion-madras-hc
Trending Judiciary
Public Ground Cannot Be Reserved For Any Religion: Madras HC [Read Order]

Madras HC rules public grounds cannot be reserved for any religion, allowing Annadhanam on village land and holding that law-and-order fears can’t curb fundamental rights.

05 November, 2025 05:10 PM
injunction-suit-without-declaration-of-title-not-maintainable-when-possession-lies-with-defendant-sc
Trending Judiciary
Injunction Suit Without Declaration Of Title Not Maintainable When Possession Lies With Defendant: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that an injunction suit without a declaration of title is not maintainable when possession rests with the defendant.

06 November, 2025 03:25 PM
when-multiple-documents-on-same-property-are-challenged-court-fee-payable-only-on-principal-relief-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
When Multiple Documents On Same Property Are Challenged, Court Fee Payable Only On Principal Relief: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court rules that when multiple documents on the same property are challenged, court fee is payable only on the principal relief.

06 November, 2025 03:40 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email