[msdivy]

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

For the nth time : the PIL was asking for a technically impossible 100% VLT, thus demonstarting the amount of thought and research that went into this PIL. As far as I am concerned, this PIL is very poorly researched and has caused a lot of problems to the very same AAM ADMI that the NGO that filed this claims to save.

Petitioner filed a PIL to prevent crime by banning sun films. He bought to the court's notice that people were using sun films. Court just held CMV rules which say no sticking anything on glass and dismissed the PIL.

Originally Posted by spadix

Exactly. And that's why the "in letter and in spirit" phrase keeps coming up.

Right. Given a English sentence its possible to twist and deduce a out of context meaning contrary to the original intent. Hence those terms pop up during a verdict.

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

I am sure it is possible to try and get the out-dated law changed. And I intened to do just that.

I agree. Thats right way and a long term solution to this issue.
PS: I guess you meant to change CMV rules.

[PatchyBoy]

Originally Posted by msdivy

Petitioner filed a PIL to prevent crime by banning sun films. He bought to the court's notice that people were using sun films. Court just held CMV rules which say no sticking anything on glass and dismissed the PIL.

That is not correct. The SC just disallowed the request for 100% VLT - not because it was technically impossible, but because they cannot issue directions that vehicles should have glasses with 100 per cent VLT in contradiction to Rule 100 of the CMV rules, which is a valid piece of legislation and is on the statute book. Once such provision exists, the Court cannot issue directions contrary to the provision of law. How I wish the court had dismissed the petition.

Here is what the SC ruled:

28. With the above directions, we partially allow this writ petition and prohibit use of black films of any percentage VLT upon the safety glasses, windscreens (front and rear) and side glasses. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Originally Posted by msdivy

I agree. Thats right way and a long term solution to this issue.
PS: I guess you meant to change CMV rules.

Thanks. Yes I meant an amendment to the CMVR permitting use of Sun Control Film that does not lower the VLT to non-compliant levels.

Rajan

[joslicx]

The Deadline day here in Bangalore and I could still see cars with tints (some very dark ones as well) on the roads (I travel on the ORR from Intel till Doddanekundi). Not all Bangaloreans taking it seriously it seems!

[Gandhi]

Originally Posted by joslicx

The Deadline day here in Bangalore and I could still see cars with tints (some very dark ones as well) on the roads (I travel on the ORR from Intel till Doddanekundi). Not all Bangaloreans taking it seriously it seems!

Deadline is tomorrow, June 5th. So people can drive cars with sun-films ON till tomorrow. I will ground my car till weekend to see if there is some more extension , otherwise will remove the sun-films over weekend myself.

[rohan_iitr]

Originally Posted by joslicx

The Deadline day here in Bangalore and I could still see cars with tints (some very dark ones as well) on the roads (I travel on the ORR from Intel till Doddanekundi). Not all Bangaloreans taking it seriously it seems!

I saw a lot of Sumo and Tavera cabs with jet black tints on my way to office today.

I just hope that the Bangalore Traffic Police doesn't give a special treatment to cabbies, while merrily collecting fines from private cars.

Rohan

[cpbopanna]

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

I saw a lot of Sumo and Tavera cabs with jet black tints on my way to office today.

I just hope that the Bangalore Traffic Police doesn't give a special treatment to cabbies, while merrily collecting fines from private cars.

Rohan

Guess Bangaloreans are expecting another extension of deadlines!

But what is wrong with that? Every time the cabbies reach the dead-line to fit speed governors, they go on strike, the Government relents and extends the deadline by another 6 months. If I remember right, this game has been going on for quite sometime.

Insofar as sun films are concerned, I guess there is no 'critical-mass' to protest::

[srishiva]

It shows how much people like the ruling. I think its about the just 100 rupee fine. People would pay the fine and then think about removing the film I guess.

[girishglg]

The news just a couple of hours ago quoting TOI -

At least Bangaloreans have to act or cough up the fines.

Your deadline to remove sun film ends tomorrow - The Times of India

"We will book cases under Section 177 of Motor Vehicles Act against those who haven't removed sun film. We will slap fine of Rs 100 on first-time offenders and Rs 300 on second-timers . The driving licence of third-time offenders may be suspended," said [COLOR=#0000ff]MA Saleem[/COLOR], [COLOR=#0000ff]additional commissioner[/COLOR] of police (traffic).
The earlier May 19 deadline was extended to June 5 for motorists' convenience. Saleem ruled out another extension in deadline.

[CRV2010]

Driving with a sun film is considered as a crime ? I don't understand the reason why driving licence has to be suspended just for driving a car with sun films. Collecting fines are okay but not suspending the DL.

[condor]

Guys, just checked with a friend who's familiar with this - no extensions. So get ready ..


Btw, cousin got fined last week in Horanadu !

[supremeBaleno]

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

Is this how you want your children to look when they are adults?

Rajan, don't you think we are over-reacting here with first the skin-cancer thing and now this truck-driver part ? All it takes is to rewind back some 10-30 years ago (depending on the current age of the posters here) when we were kids and given the amount of time we spent under the sun playing cricket/hockey/football/hide-n-seek etc, we should have not just had cancer, but disintegrated by now. And when did the car-revolution happen ? Early eighties when MUL came in ? How did most families commute before that ? 4-5 on a Hamara Bajaj which did not even have a roof/windows, forget sunfilm.

Originally Posted by PatchyBoy

Thanks. I could not have explained it any better. You see, the problem is this is not a variable like speed limits. So, you get stopped by a cop in Karnataka, or maybe even one part of a city who says," You have very light films so, they are OK". So you drive on happily and another cop in another part stops you and says,"No films. Period." and tears it off, So, who has to make the cops aware and create a common understanding?

Instead of trying to make the cops aware, isn't it easier to make ourselves aware ? The ruling says "no films" and from what I understand, the judges did not bring in any new rule - they just enforced implementation of existing MV rule which does not allow any films to be pasted on glass. So why this kolaveri against Goenka/Judjes etc ? Remove the films and you are ok - no need to bother about interpretation of the rule by some cop in whichever part of the country.

[v-drive]

I am hearing a lot of rumors now. One allegedly originated from 3M saying that some ruling is expected on transparency is coming from bangalore. Another one coming from NCR is that court has allowed upto 70% visibility films.
No definite info though, but heard from some friends.

[rohan_iitr]

One silly question - the deadline (in Bangalore) ends tomorrow (5th Jun).

Does it mean that Bangalore Traffic Police will start slapping fines from 5th Jun or does it mean that they will start slapping fines from 6th Jun.

Rohan

[Gandhi]

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

One silly question - the deadline (in Bangalore) ends tomorrow (5th Jun).

Does it mean that Bangalore Traffic Police will start slapping fines from 5th Jun or does it mean that they will start slapping fines from 6th Jun.

Rohan

5th June is the last date for removal of sun-film. They'll start fining violators starting June 6th.

[mpksuhas]

^ From what I made out from TOI article it will be from Wednesday that they will fine you.