Despite law, 2-wheeler buyers not given free helmets: PIL

  • | Saturday | 16th February, 2019

The question is whether the manufacturer had supplied the protective headgears in respect of the vehicles supplied to the dealers. “It is mandatory for the RTO to take an undertaking from two-wheeler buyers that they have received two helmets with the purchase of the vehicle. However, the respondent agencies, dealing with two-wheelers, can state as to whether the manufacturers had supplied them the protective headgears. It is upon this response, it can be decided as to whether the manufacturer can be made party/respondent in this petition. The manufacturers are not party/respondent in this PIL.

Nagpur: Two-wheeler buyers are being deprived of two free helmets, which are to be mandatorily supplied by manufacturers, for the last 13 years, claimed a public interest litigation.The PIL, filed in the Nagpur bench of Bombay high court, also claimed that as per Central Motor Vehicles Rules, the Regional Transport Office (RTO) has to ensure compliance of the free helmet norm and not to register new vehicles without verifying it. However, an alleged nexus between manufacturers, dealers and RTOs has been defrauding the customers, claimed Saurabh Bhardwaj and Manish Singh Chauhan, office-bearers of Oriental Human Rights Protection Forum, in the PIL filed through advocate Avdhesh Kesari.Hearing the PIL, Justice RK Deshpande and Justice Vinay Joshi on February 13 issued notices to the ministry of road safety and transport, state’s road safety and transport department, RTO and 17 dealers of two-wheelers in the city.“The relief claimed in this PIL is to see the compliance of Rule 138(4)(f) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, which prescribes that at the time of purchase of a two-wheeler, the manufacturer shall supply a protective headgear conforming to the specifications prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986,” the judges said.“The complaint in this PIL is that such headgears are not being supplied by the dealers. The question is whether the manufacturer had supplied the protective headgears in respect of the vehicles supplied to the dealers. The manufacturers are not party/respondent in this PIL. However, the respondent agencies, dealing with two-wheelers, can state as to whether the manufacturers had supplied them the protective headgears. It is upon this response, it can be decided as to whether the manufacturer can be made party/respondent in this petition. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on April 10,” the judges directed.“The petitioners have filed the PIL on the basis of information received under the RTI Act and an undertaking given by 15 customers who bought two-wheelers. “It is mandatory for the RTO to take an undertaking from two-wheeler buyers that they have received two helmets with the purchase of the vehicle. An application under RTI Act was submitted with the RTO on April 6, 2018, seeking documents related to registration of all two-wheelers between June 1, 2017 and February 25, 2018. During inspection of the files, we found no such undertakings have been attached. We have obtained documents of 50 cases,” they said.The petitioners added that a typed undertaking showing compliance of the helmet norm was found in one of the cases, which smacks of foul play. “One of the dealers had fraudulently received purchaser’s signature over a typed declaration form. Prima facie it shows the purchaser’s signature was obtained on the form on the pretext of registering the vehicle from the RTO,” they alleged.The petitioners added, “We also obtained an undertaking from 15 persons who have purchased two-wheelers. All have given in writing that they were not provided with two helmets,” they said.Highlighting the information received under the RTI Act that over 4,140 helmetless riders had died in accidents between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017 in the state, the petitioners claimed that many of these lives could have been saved if the respondents, more specifically RTOs, had ensured compliance of the free helmet norm at the time of vehicle registration itself.INFORule: Central Motor Vehicle Rules 138 (4) (f) says, “At the time of the purchase of two wheeler the manufacturer of the two wheeler shall supply a protective headgear confirming specifications prescribed by Bureau of Indian Standards under the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 (63) provided that these conditions shall not apply to category to person exempted in terms of Section 129 and the rules made there under by the concern State GovernmentsEffective Date: The rule was inserted by general statutory rules (GSR) 589 (e), dated September 16, 2005 with effect from March 16, 2006RTO Aware: The office of transport commissioner on February 6, 2016 and January 10, 2018 had issued letters to RTO to issue directions to all dealers for giving two helmets per vehicle, not to register any vehicle without an undertaking from purchaser and action against dealers for not complying the norms. The RTO has provided the letters to petitioners under RTI ActPrayers:*Directions to respondents for compliance of the norms strictly*Cancellation of dealership license who did not comply the norms*Direct state to conduct an inquiry against RTO*Compensation from respondents to kin of those without helmets died in road mishaps*Action against dealers and manufacturersAffected Persons: Over 60,000 two-wheelers are registered every year

If You Like This Story, Support NYOOOZ

NYOOOZ SUPPORTER

NYOOOZ FRIEND

Your support to NYOOOZ will help us to continue create and publish news for and from smaller cities, which also need equal voice as much as citizens living in bigger cities have through mainstream media organizations.


Stay updated with all the Latest Nagpur headlines here. For more exclusive & live news updates from all around India, stay connected with NYOOOZ.

Related Articles