Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


View Poll Results: My action on the Sun Film Ban
I have already removed it (DIY) 157 19.33%
I have already removed it (Got help) 106 13.05%
I will remove it before the deadline (DIY) 62 7.64%
I will remove it before the deadline (from a shop) 73 8.99%
I will ground my car and wait & watch for the order to change 375 46.18%
Mine are factory fitted and I can't remove them 39 4.80%
Voters: 812. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th August 2012, 11:50   #496
BHPian
 
mannubhai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 409
Thanked: 285 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by Optimus7 View Post
Women folks will certainly feel much safer in cabs without any sun films, when travelling alone.
I am still seeing a lot of cars with dark tints in chennai. The least the cops can do is remove the tints from these offenders. If people violate a direct order by the Highest judiciary in the country, what type of signal does it send to the next generation?
======
Optimus, Women drivers dont agree to that I'm told. Most of my friends belonging to the fairer-sex, who drive to work , feel less comfortable and prone to threats without the films. Its not just about the stares and being "raped by the eyes" situation. They drive back at odd hours and are truly exposed with no privacy what so ever.


Quote:
Originally Posted by naveen.raju View Post
Is it true that light sun films are allowed? My friend was caught yesterday and the cop (SI) told him to go for light films if necessary. He had medium dark ones.
=======
Naveen, the ruling is clear that you CANNOT have any film in the car.
mannubhai is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 11:53   #497
BHPian
 
Alive2Drive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 167
Thanked: 48 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Hi Guys,

Any update on the verdict, I understand that the ban is implemented as of now however what is the status of the appeal by the industry against the ban ?
Alive2Drive is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 11:59   #498
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: EU - Nordic
Posts: 1,563
Thanked: 953 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daewood View Post
You have omitted the points which explain the 'safety angle'.
Quoting from points 1 to 10.
The initial points on safety angle is what the petitioner has mentioned in his petition (atleast that is the way I understood it).

Quote:
1. Alarming rise in heinous crimes like kidnapping, sexual
assault on women and dacoity have impinged upon the right
to life and the right to live in a safe environment which are
within the contours of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
One of the contributory factors to such increase is use of black
films on windows/windshields of four-wheeled vehicles. The
petitioner, as a public spirited person, has invoked the extraordinary
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the
Constitution in the present public interest litigation, praying
for certain directions to stop this menace.
Quote:
2. The use of black films upon the vehicles gives immunity
to the violators in committing a crime and is used as a tool of
criminality, considerably increasing criminal activities. At
times, heinous crimes like dacoity, rape, murder and even
terrorist acts are committed in or with the aid of vehicles
having black films pasted on the side windows and on the
screens of the vehicles. It is stated that because of nonobservance
of the norms, regulations and guidelines relating
to the specifications for the front and rear windscreens and
the side windows of the vehicles, the offenders can move
undetected in such vehicles and commit crimes without
hesitation.
Quote:
5. The use of black films also prevents the traffic police from
seeing the activity in the car and communicating with the
driver of the vehicle. The petitioner also cites that the number
of fatal accidents of vehicles having black films is much higher
in India than in other parts of the world.
Also note that the point about the "use of black films also prevents the traffic police from seeing the activity in the car" seems to be supported by various police departments, as per point 8 which I am now quoting in full.

The part about usage of sunfilms in other parts of the world also seems to have come from the petitioner's claims.

Quote:
8. The petitioner claims to have received various replies
from the police department of different States like Tamil Nadu,
West Bengal, Delhi and Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi.
On the basis of the replies received under the provisions of the
Right to Information Act, 2005, copies of which have been
annexed to the writ petition, it is averred that these authorities
are of the unanimous opinion that black films should be
banned. Black filmed glasses help in commission of crime as
well as hiding the criminals even during vehicle checks at
‘Naka’ points. Non-availability of electronic devices to measure
violations and lack of police force to enforce the Rules are also
apparent from these replies. The petitioner also states that
the use of black films is not prevalent in developed and/or
developing countries all over the world. In fact, in some of the
countries, it is specifically banned. In Afghanistan, Belarus,
Nigeria, Uganda and even in Pakistan, use of black films on
the vehicle glasses is banned. Use of black films is not
prevalent in United States of America, United Kingdom,
Germany and other countries as well.
Please also note from the above that the court has also been provided with replies from some state governments and central government which agree with the petitioner's claims on the safety aspects. So what is the court supposed to do?

The other point is that the decision to ban sunfilms is based on what is specified (and not specified) in the CMVR as it stands now. The court has banned sunfilms because it is not specifically allowed in CMVR, and not because it is a safety threat. Please also note that the court has declined the prayer to have 100% VLT since the CMVR already states the minimum acceptable VLT %.

Last edited by StarrySky : 8th August 2012 at 12:01.
StarrySky is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 8th August 2012, 12:04   #499
Senior - BHPian
 
scopriobharath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chennai
Posts: 3,565
Thanked: 1,175 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alive2Drive View Post
Hi Guys,

Any update on the verdict, I understand that the ban is implemented as of now however what is the status of the appeal by the industry against the ban ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarrySky View Post
The initial points on safety angle is what the petitioner has mentioned in his petition (atleast that is the way I understood it).
Yes ! The Ban stays and is hear to stay. Summer is over (alost) so dont expect any counter-petition before March 2013. The court has anyway turned down the counter petition.
scopriobharath is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 12:08   #500
Distinguished - BHPian
 
naveen.raju's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cochin
Posts: 3,735
Thanked: 3,118 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by mannubhai View Post
======
=======
Naveen, the ruling is clear that you CANNOT have any film in the car.
Think even the cops are confused. When I was caught, the cop said "NO FILMS". Yesterday when my friend was caught the cop said "LIGHT FILMS ALLOWED". I think in Blore, there was this confusion. I know that the rule clearly mentions "no films". But then why this wrong information from the cops?

I think they are busy trying to extract the max from common people.
naveen.raju is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 12:39   #501
BHPian
 
Daewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chennai
Posts: 943
Thanked: 223 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarrySky View Post
The initial points on safety angle is what the petitioner has mentioned in his petition (atleast that is the way I understood it).
Yes, the petitioner has mentioned them and the court has accepted them, instead of rejecting that theory, and has quoted the CMVR 100 rule as justification for granting a part of his pleading.
He asked for 100% visibility an got 70% visibility for front and 50% for sides. But the problem is none of the cars below 25L come with 50% visibility on the sides and hence the consumer was using the aid of sunfilms to get the full benefits of the CMVR 100 rule. The court has ruled out that possibility now.

In effect it's a huge opportunity for car makers to introduce a new variant with 50% tinted glass and rake in some extra moolah.

Last edited by Daewood : 8th August 2012 at 12:51.
Daewood is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 14:01   #502
Distinguished - BHPian
 
sgiitk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kanpur
Posts: 7,160
Thanked: 3,755 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Slightly OT. Finally they started enforcement in Kanpur yesterday.
sgiitk is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 14:02   #503
BHPian
 
one-77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: KL08/MH01
Posts: 358
Thanked: 198 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sedate
I now know what Bhagat Singh and Gandhi felt during British rule. My loved ones seems should travel with fully covered clothing(even face?) to avoid the indecent looks at the traffic signals. They felt comfortable as at least there is some layer of visibility blocking with sun films! As they say "God- why you made me look beautiful!"

I now know what business people felt when GAAR was thought of. I now know how Sistema and Telenor(they guys who were not part of bribery/any fraud and later bought stake in Syam and Unitech telcos) felt after 2G case. You invest your hard earned money and one day the court tells you - "The interpretation of law makes you a criminal -You will now be hanged at town gate- You could have followed the law earlier, but now its illegal! You the criminal ! "

On a personal level, I wont run business in a country like this, even if it is my home land.

This sun film ban is very much an encroachment on my personal freedom and liberty. I searched and installed only the 70/50 films from reputed manufacturers(3m and VKool). Now I am that ******* who seems to have violated every law of land! Yes, I am now waiting to be hanged at town gate!

If there is less development in this country, this is the reason. If there is brain-drain from this country, this is the reason!

And I will become part of that brain drain the day, I will get booked for using a film with 70% VLT on front/rear and 50% VLT on sides. Fed up of serving this country - working for its villagers, helping them build libraries, teaching them how to use TPM techniques on farm equipments, improving agriculture with modern equipments and promoting organic farming! After all who cares for one lame *** guy leaving his country - there are 100 million more people in the country and a million is getting born every year!

Now it will be working for some gora sab and earning his dollars - Thank you dear supreme court for blowing sense to me and helping me become rich. After all, only people with big pockets can buy high end cars with inbuilt tints.
Phew!
So driving without sun-films make you feel what Gandhi and Bhagat Singh did under British rule, and that feeling is forcing you to "quit India" for some country where sun films are legal, so you could also serve some "gora saab"?
Though riddled with paradoxes, that was quite novel. I think I must get the films off my cars too. Not that I wish to leave the country, but I would certainly like to feel what Gandhi and Singh did..
Oh, and by the way, I suggest you move to Saudi Arabia. That would satisfy most of your requirements; you can use sun films, no one will see your women, and if you're lucky enough, you might even get employed by some "gora saab"!
Wishing you luck!
one-77 is offline   (2) Thanks
Old 8th August 2012, 14:16   #504
BHPian
 
Daewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chennai
Posts: 943
Thanked: 223 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

^^ It's these kind of many small irritants, that drive people out of the country for 'better' places. I know of many college mates who left this country unable to 'adjust' with the way things happen here, than for monetary benefits.
Daewood is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 14:18   #505
Senior - BHPian
 
rajeev k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Emerging Metro
Posts: 3,306
Thanked: 1,730 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by naveen.raju View Post
Is it true that light sun films are allowed? My friend was caught yesterday and the cop (SI) told him to go for light films if necessary. He had medium dark ones.
I also fell to the MVD net yesterday at Collectorate traffic signal junction and had to pay fine and was told that soon violators will be produced before the court and vehicle registrations are liable for termination. They even caught a guy who had retained the film only in his quarter window glasses.

Funny part is a guy with a hacksaw blade knife contacted me for film removal.
rajeev k is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 8th August 2012, 14:51   #506
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: EU - Nordic
Posts: 1,563
Thanked: 953 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daewood View Post
Yes, the petitioner has mentioned them and the court has accepted them, instead of rejecting that theory, and has quoted the CMVR 100 rule as justification for granting a part of his pleading.
The "theory" has been supported by various police departments and union home department, as is clearly mentioned in the judgement. So then, why should the court reject the theory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daewood View Post
He asked for 100% visibility an got 70% visibility for front and 50% for sides.
He didn't "get" 70% visibility. 70%/50% was already in the rules. His prayer for 100% VLT was rejected since the rule allows 70% and the court refused to change that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daewood View Post
But the problem is none of the cars below 25L come with 50% visibility on the sides and hence the consumer was using the aid of sunfilms to get the full benefits of the CMVR 100 rule. The court has ruled out that possibility now.
As per the judgement, the CMVR 100 rule states that the visibility of the glass shall be minimum X% during manufacture and shall be maintained as such. That is the visibility shall be maintained in the same condition as when the glass was manufactured. Thus, in the court's interpretation, using sunfilms was never legal. In fact, the judgement also quotes another Supreme Court judgement from as far back as 1998, where the use of black films was prohibited, i.e., the judgement did not turn something that was legal into illegal "overnight" as some members have posted.

Last edited by StarrySky : 8th August 2012 at 14:53.
StarrySky is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 14:54   #507
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cochin
Posts: 159
Thanked: 70 Times
Arrow Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by one-77 View Post
Phew!
So driving without sun-films make you feel what Gandhi and Bhagat Singh did under British rule, and that feeling is forcing you to "quit India" for some country where sun films are legal, so you could also serve some "gora saab"?
Though riddled with paradoxes, that was quite novel. I think I must get the films off my cars too. Not that I wish to leave the country, but I would certainly like to feel what Gandhi and Singh did..
Oh, and by the way, I suggest you move to Saudi Arabia. That would satisfy most of your requirements; you can use sun films, no one will see your women, and if you're lucky enough, you might even get employed by some "gora saab"!
Wishing you luck!
It is not driving without sunfilm that makes me feel like BhagatSingh or Gandhi - It is the kind of rules and rulings!

Love Saudi Arabia - Atleast they have a single ruler or strong goveranace there! It is not like, one rule today and change in rule tomorrow. They have clearly set rules and people follow rules.

Here instead of obeying spirit of the law, we are going after "verbal definition" and "redefinition".
These retroactive redefinitions are making me sick! Yes, but its not quit india, it "quit the bad indian governance". Anyways thank alot.
Sedate is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 8th August 2012, 15:04   #508
BHPian
 
Daewood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chennai
Posts: 943
Thanked: 223 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by StarrySky View Post
As per the judgement, the CMVR 100 rule states that the visibility of the glass shall be minimum X% during manufacture and shall be maintained as such. That is the visibility shall be maintained in the same condition as when the glass was manufactured. Thus, in the court's interpretation, using sunfilms was never legal.
The big difference between mine and your(and the court's) interpretation is the word 'manufacture' which you've inserted, while i'm asking to stick to the original word "maintain", of Rule 100 part(2) of CMVR.
Quote:
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

Last edited by Daewood : 8th August 2012 at 15:25.
Daewood is offline  
Old 8th August 2012, 16:03   #509
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: EU - Nordic
Posts: 1,563
Thanked: 953 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daewood View Post
The big difference between mine and your(and the court's) interpretation is the word 'manufacture' which you've inserted, while i'm asking to stick to the original word "maintain", of Rule 100 part(2) of CMVR.
I didn't insert any words, it's already there in the CMVR.
Quote:
100. Safety glass.—(1) The glass of windscreens and the windows of every motor vehicle 188[other than agricultural tractors] shall be of safety glass:
Quote:
Explanation.—For the purpose of this rule,—
(i) "safety glass" means glass 190[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;
CMVR further states:

Quote:
192[(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.
The court has also explained it's interpretation further in the 2nd judgement (on the review petition):

Quote:
15. Equally, without substance and merit is the submission that the expression 'maintained' used in Rule 100 would imply that subsequent to manufacturing, the car can be maintained by use of films with requisite VLT of 70 per cent and 50 per cent respectively. In the judgment, after discussing the scheme of the Act, the Rules framed thereunder and Rule 100 read in conjunction with Indian Standard No.2553 Part II of 1992, this court took the view that the Rule does not permit use of any other material except the safety glass 'manufactured as per the requirements of law'. Rule 100 categorically states that 'safety glass' is the glass which is to be manufactured as per the specification and requirements of explanation to Rule 100(1). It is only the safety glasses alone that can be used by the manufacturer of the vehicle. The requisite VLT has to be 70 per cent and 50 per cent of the screen and side windows respectively, without external aid of any kind of material, including the films pasted on the safety glasses. The use of film on the glass would change the very concept and requirements of safety glass in accordance with law. The expression 'maintained' has to be construed to say that, what is required to be manufactured in accordance with law should be continued to be maintained as such.
StarrySky is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 8th August 2012, 16:27   #510
Senior - BHPian
 
rajeev k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Emerging Metro
Posts: 3,306
Thanked: 1,730 Times
Default Re: Your reaction to the Sun Film Verdict? EDIT - Ban in effect post 25th July judgem

^^^ Some hot discussions up there.
But the fact remains that the film removal spree will be over after some time and the filming will start afresh. The cycle repeats.
This had happened earlier, if I am remembering rightly.

Last edited by rajeev k : 8th August 2012 at 16:46.
rajeev k is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Karnataka Road Tax, Crack down announced.EDIT: High Court Judgement on Pg 36 attached binoyb22 The Indian Car Scene 1124 10th March 2016 19:00
Sun Protection, without sun film - Options? tsk1979 Technical Stuff 55 17th December 2015 23:24
Sun Film or Security Film? lambuhere1 Modifications & Accessories 18 21st May 2013 11:57
Corolla Altis 2009- your verdict? Ym-enjn Sedans 94 31st October 2008 11:57


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 20:09.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks