[fast&furious]

Originally Posted by Daewood

I guess most of us here use sunglasses while driving. You know what's the VLT of most sunglasses including the green-gray Ray Ban Aviators? 12-16%. The darker ones have VLT as low as 8%. Why none of those are considered suicidal. Agree not many use sunglasses after sundown, but then what's the difference between between 15%VLT sunglasses in daylight and 50% VLT sunfilm in night.

Great point.
But I don't think most of us here at tbhp wear sunglasses while driving, on a daily basis. Even on the highways I rarely see people driving with sunglasses on. Btw, driving glasses/sunglasses are available in the market. One shouldn't use the regular ones while driving.

And I believe it's something that the driver himself should decide. If he's not able to see, he should stop using it for his own safety. And IIRC the increasing no. crimes inside tinted cars is what prompted the SC to ban sunfilms.

[Daewood]

Originally Posted by Rehaan

the second picture would have been even more apt if the 15% VLT was applied over a car window (eg. if we were cops trying to look in from the bright outside).

Originally Posted by fast&furious

And IIRC the increasing no. crimes inside tinted cars is what prompted the SC to ban sunfilms.

Yes, the view from outside to inside was the 'unfortunate' logic of the Indian court.
My post was to those arguments here in this thread that, "only those who aren't bothered about safety of others will have sunflms in cars".
I wanted to highlight that upto a certain limit (guess 35% VLT as followed by some western countries) the aperture of the eye compensates for loss in luminance by increasing it's pupil size. Another thing which i read on the internet is having some tint or sunfilm is actually better for 'day-vision' than having clear glass, because sometimes the sunlight becomes too much for the human eye to handle and we momentarily close our eyes, like when the sun reflects of a sedan's rear glass or from a metallic white paint. It seems the prevalance of dark glasses in visor of the F1 drivers, pilots,etc is too due to this factor.

[GTO]

Guys,

In 180 pages, whatever needed to be said on the SC verdict has already been. To avoid the discussion from going around in circles, I'm closing this thread.

Related Threads

DIY : Removing Sunfilm

Legal Alternatives to Sunfilm

Mangaloreans to file review petition

Thanks

[Chhanda Das]

No matter how expensive or how cheap the sunfilm is, it is still illegal on the safety glasses of consumer cars in India as per the honorable Supreme Court of India (links below).
1) https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/39452.pdf
2) https://hpsja.nic.in/Prohibition.pdf

So I don't know why people still consider these as an option and blatantly violate the laws while complaining that our Indian roads are full of lawlessness

[raptor_diwan]

Originally Posted by Chhanda Das

No matter how expensive or how cheap the sunfilm is, it is still illegal on the safety glasses of consumer cars in India as per the honorable Supreme Court of India (links below).
1) https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/39452.pdf
2) https://hpsja.nic.in/Prohibition.pdf

So I don't know why people still consider these as an option and blatantly violate the laws while complaining that our Indian roads are full of lawlessness

Are you certain about this? If you dig deep into these laws you can find only dark black tint is prohibited, and they permit tint with a minimum visibility of 50% on side window glasses and a minimum visibility of 70% on front and rear glasses.

0[(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 11[IS: 2553— Part
2—1992];
——————–

Source

The tint I applied matches legal VTL and not a dark tint. I have, in fact, verified this with my insurance agent, who confirmed it according to RTO regulations. So, there's no need to worry about it. However, I am one of the people who oppose this rule. I am genuinely concerned about those who believe that my dark tint, chosen for my security or privacy, will cause problems on Indian roads. If they genuinely think that, they should not be allowed to drive.

This rule was actually created to prevent rape, and in my opinion, it was a misguided decision. Rape cases have increased rapidly since the introduction of this rule. It was introduced in 2012 when rape cases in India were 24,923, and by 2016, it had risen to 38,947, reaching its peak. Banning tint has no effect on this issue because it has nothing to do with it. However, there are still a few people who believe that this is enough to prevent rape. Tomorrow, if a rape happens inside a room, the government might suggest that everyone should sleep with their bedroom doors open, so we can be sure that no rape is happening inside. And people are going to say, 'obey the law.' Damn these people.

But the ones who introduced the rule will be in the car with dark tint, traveling with ease and without any problems. Privacy is important for them, but not for the common people. Where is freedom? Shhhh, obey the law, or else don't say India has more rape and is lawless; alright alright, we are obeying this law.

[skviknaraj]

Originally Posted by raptor_diwan

Are you certain about this? If you dig deep into these laws you can find only dark black tint is prohibited,

Please do refer to this point. Dark black or blue is not the matter, any black films

40. For the reasons afore-stated, we prohibit the use of black films of any VLT
percentage or any other material upon the safety glasses, windscreens (front and rear)
and side glasses of all vehicles throughout the country. The Home Secretary, Director
General/Commissioner of Police of the respective States/Centre shall ensure
compliance with this direction. The directions contained in this judgment shall become
operative and enforceable with effect from 4th May, 2012.”

FYI: tint refers to the shade of the glass from the vehicle manufacturer itself.

I am not touching upon the legal aspects here, just be ready / aware when you are dealing with Traffic police within TN or outside as they enforce this judgement based on their mood/whims and fancies.

By the way, try to verify the brand of the sunfilm used.

[raptor_diwan]

Originally Posted by skviknaraj

Please do refer to this point. Dark black or blue is not the matter, any black films



FYI: tint refers to the shade of the glass from the vehicle manufacturer itself.

I am not touching upon the legal aspects here, just be ready / aware when you are dealing with Traffic police within TN or outside as they enforce this judgement based on their mood/whims and fancies.

By the way, try to verify the brand of the sunfilm used.

OMG, so many people are not getting it. It's not about darkness or color; it's all about VLT. And mine matches that VLT. TN cops are cool with it until it matches the legal VLT; I've dealt with them already, no issues there. Perhaps the cops in Kerala and Bangalore missed the memo on VLT – You know, it's not a complex concept, but not sure why everyone can't grasp it so they focus on the brand name to hide their incompetence Maybe a crash course on tinted windows would do people some good!

[raptor_diwan]

Adding additional information for those who think tint is illegal. Police use tint meters to check, and the meter measures the amount of light that passes through, providing a reading in VLT. VLT has to match the legally allowed limit.

When you use a tint with the legal VLT, it obviously won't be dark, making it completely legal.

VLT - Visible Light Transmission

- Some vehicles come with dark tint from the manufacturing level, not matching the government's VLT standards. In the case of using green glass from the manufacturer, it still has to comply with the issued VLT level by the government. Apart from these cases, other windows are clear, and we can apply tint and check using a tint meter to ensure it is legal.

[skviknaraj]

Originally Posted by raptor_diwan

OMG, so many people are not getting it. It's not about darkness or color; it's all about VLT. And mine matches that VLT. TN cops are cool with it until it matches the legal VLT; I've dealt with them already, no issues there. Perhaps the cops in Kerala and Bangalore missed the memo on VLT – You know, it's not a complex concept, but not sure why everyone can't grasp it so they focus on the brand name to hide their incompetence Maybe a crash course on tinted windows would do people some good!

May be a crash course for the cops is what is required. How are you so sure that VLT % percentage is met with the film you have installed?

Do you have a meter to show the cops when they have flagged you for it or do the cops have one?

Regarding your comment about hiding incompetence with enquiring about brand name is unwarranted. The reason I have asked to verify the brand is because the sunfilm is essentially a plastic film. A few years down the line it will degrade. Cheap ones come with no guarantee tend to breakdown faster and peeling it off will be an additional headache.

so anyways, your car, what ever rocks/rows your boat.

[raptor_diwan]

Originally Posted by skviknaraj

How are you so sure that VLT % percentage is met with the film you have installed?

Do you have a meter to show the cops when they have flagged you for it or do the cops have one?

As I mentioned previously, I have dealt with TN police. They checked my vehicle near Little Mount,( under bridge ) Saidapet, Chennai, and indeed, they have a tint meter for verification. They allowed me to go after the check. If the tint is excessively dark, they'll simply remove it, and there's nothing we can do and no need of meter as well. However, when they focus on flagging people for tint during their monthly checks in the area, they use the meter to test and permit vehicles.

Sadly, it's frustrated to see that having an advocate sticker is sufficient for them to overlook vehicles with completely dark tint. It's frustrating when someone talks about following the law to me.

Why is it that only common man with S-Presso get flagged down for following the rules, while those with Fortuner and complete dark tint, illegal front bumpers, loud horns, and illegal lights get away with just an advocate sticker or a political flag? People seem unwilling to address these issues, and it's disheartening to witness different treatment for different individuals.

Regarding the brand aspect, as I mentioned in my first post, the shop is well-known to my friend, who also owns another shop in Gp Road. He guaranteed that in case of any issues, he will replace it, and there is a one-year guarantee. So, I am not worrying about it. However, I'm sharing this because not everyone may have a known friend in Gp Road. It's best to avoid cheap options and invest in a good one, not necessarily to escape legal aspects, but for better quality.

[Chhanda Das]

Originally Posted by raptor_diwan

Are you certain about this? If you dig deep into these laws you can find only dark black tint is prohibited, and they permit tint with a minimum visibility of 50% on side window glasses and a minimum visibility of 70% on front and rear glasses.

I am absolutely certain about this. No matter what material (read films) you apply on the safety glass areas subsequent to the manufacturing of that glass, it is still illegal irrespective of its VTL percentage (image below from one of the links that I shared earlier).



And no matter, how transparent the film is, its VTL percentage can never be 100% as per the laws of physics. So the moment you paste the film on the safety glass, the VLT percentage of the glass+film combination is reduced and we are not allowed to modify the VTL percentage of the safety glass subsequent to its manufacturing. So forget films, even tinting is illegal. You are welcome.

Please let me know if you need more proof. Personally, I do not agree with the honorable Supreme Court of India's judgement in this regard but I accept and obey it all the same.

Originally Posted by raptor_diwan

I have, in fact, verified this with my insurance agent, who confirmed it according to RTO regulations. So, there's no need to worry about it. However, I am one of the people who oppose this rule.

I would highly recommend to ask your "insurance agent" who allegedly said this to state the same on written and witnessed record so that you can claim compensation from him if, God forbid, anything untoward happens. If this "insurance agent" is truthful then I am 100% sure that he would have no qualms about stating the same in written form under witness. Wish you happy and safe driving

[raptor_diwan]

Originally Posted by Chhanda Das

You are joking, right ?
In all seriousness, I would highly recommend to ask your "insurance agent" who allegedly said this to state the same on written and witnessed record so that you can claim compensation from him if, God forbid, anything untoward happens. If this "insurance agent" is truthful then I am 100% sure that he would have no qualms about stating the same in written form under witness. Wish you happy and safe driving

You can find articles on all insurance companies with a quick Google search.



Source from ICICI Insurance: https://www.icicilombard.com/blogs/c...d-glass-in-car

He mentioned that even if the tint is within legal limits, claims can be declined, then they have to reject 98% of cases they receive. From what I've observed in Team BHP itself, it seems like 90% of people use tint within legal limits. Anyway, I'm not here to be a moral police. Reaching out to your insurance agent might shed light on you.

[Chhanda Das]

I am sure that Google is not the authority when it comes to legal interpretations and neither are insurance provider companies

The honorable Supreme Court of India has made it amply clear that no film is legal on the safety glass areas of consumer cars. Also, I don't trust insurance agents with critical matters like this since they can misguide clients as is very evident in your case. I would highly recommend you to consult legal professionals and not "insurance agents" in legal matters

[raptor_diwan]

Originally Posted by Chhanda Das

they can misguide clients as is very evident in your case. I would highly recommend you to consult legal professionals and not "insurance agents" in legal matters

it's globally posted on their insurance website even multiple insurance company websites for their customers to clarify on this yet its incorrect, it appears they might be misguiding customers across PAN India. Perhaps, in the future, I should consider involving my lawyer and their team when purchasing insurance. Thank you

[condor]

Originally Posted by Chhanda Das

And no matter, how transparent the film is, its VTL percentage can never be 100% as per the laws of physics. So the moment you paste the film on the safety glass, the VLT percentage of the glass+film combination is reduced and we are not allowed to modify the VTL percentage of the safety glass subsequent to its manufacturing. So forget films, even tinting is illegal.

Just to add: this point has been discussed in a separate thread. This and the other thread on sunfilm (not the legal aspects) has discussions only on sunfilm and which ones to get. Thank you.