[esteem_lover]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

I doubt this is the case in west if you hit a jaywalking pedestrian on the freeway.
Here you have to pay compensation even if somebody jumps in front of your car to commit suicide.

This law was framed to help the insurance companies, but it backfired on them when people just fell in front of cars/trucks & demanded compensation.

P.S do you know that the 3rd party claim in your insurance is like almost 20 times your IDV ?

[Mayavi]

Originally Posted by 1100D

Thats how it is almost everywhere else, even where you are located. Hit a pedestrian, you are at fault, no matter where and how you hit him/her.

errr... not entirely correct. It depends on the circumstances. If driver saw the pedestrian and still hit him, it is the drivers fault. If the pedestrian is jaywalking on a busy street in the middle of night, then there wont be any charges. Last week a jaywalker got killed and the polcie didn't arrest the driver.

Anyway, seems that the Indian law applies to vehicles and not just pedestrians. So if a bus hits a bike driving in wrong direction, it is still the bus drivers fault.

Esteem Lover:

Some people who have left the shores actually feel that everything about this country is wrong, i just cannot understand this. Have they actually lived here before they went to the developed countries ? Once they start driving fancy cars & experience the 'freedom', they just forget where they came from. I am absolutely confused. welcome to India. We still love OUR freedom.

I am assuming that the comment was directed and me and I must say I am amused. May I please direct you to the International vs Indian cars thread? Not everything is wrong with the country but certainly not everything is right. Just like one is supposed the appreciate the good, one is also supposed to criticize the bad. That is the only way a country can progress.

[Mayavi]

Read the whole post and other than Section 140 and ambiguity in another section regarding speeding in public places (no prima facia mentioned) the MV act seems pretty sensible. Now if they make it available during license tests or make driving lessons mandatory where these rules are taught, our streets would become so much safer.

[esteem_lover]

Sorry, it was not directed at you, it was directed at people who bribed their way to get their international license & also bribed their way to get a passport just so that they can travel abroad & drive a car. Not specifically at anyone. cheers

[rr_zen]

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

Some people who have left the shores actually feel that everything about this country is wrong, i just cannot understand this. Have they actually lived here before they went to the developed countries ? Once they start driving fancy cars & experience the 'freedom', they just forget where they came from. I am absolutely confused. welcome to India. We still love OUR freedom.

We sure love India and our freedom ! I feel that now more than anytime in my 33 years of existence, as I am far away from my motherland for more than a year now.

[codemarauder]

Rear View Mirror (Rule 125 CMV Rules)
Every motor vehicle, except motor cycles, must be fitted with a rear view mirror in such a way that the driver has a clear vision of the traffic behind.

Ah, and I was fined by a cop in Bangalore 3 years back for not having a rear view mirror on the motorcycle :(

[amit]

Not sure if this has been discussed earlier but nowadays in Navi Mumbai, I see a lot of khaki clad cops stopping two wheeler riders and fining them or giving them a challan for not wearing helmets. Once they are stopped for not wearing helmets they are also asked to show their vehicle documents. I haven't seen them stop a four wheeler yet but maybe they do.

Question is do the cops have the authority to stop vehicles and drivers or is this something that only the traffic policemen can do? And if they don't have that authority then can drivers refuse to show them their licence or vehicle papers?

[mithun]

Originally Posted by amit

Not sure if this has been discussed earlier but nowadays in Navi Mumbai, I see a lot of khaki clad cops stopping two wheeler riders and fining them or giving them a challan for not wearing helmets. Once they are stopped for not wearing helmets they are also asked to show their vehicle documents. I haven't seen them stop a four wheeler yet but maybe they do.

Question is do the cops have the authority to stop vehicles and drivers or is this something that only the traffic policemen can do? And if they don't have that authority then can drivers refuse to show them their licence or vehicle papers?

Not all the cops have the authority to stop the cars BUT all those who are SI & above have the authority !

[esteem_lover]

Originally Posted by mithun

Not all the cops have the authority to stop the cars BUT all those who are SI & above have the authority !

What makes you say such a thing unless you know something about IPC that no one else knows.
Please prefix an 'I think before what you say when you do not have solid proof. No offence meant though.

Originally Posted by amit

Not sure if this has been discussed earlier but nowadays in Navi Mumbai, I see a lot of khaki clad cops stopping two wheeler riders and fining them or giving them a challan for not wearing helmets. Once they are stopped for not wearing helmets they are also asked to show their vehicle documents. I haven't seen them stop a four wheeler yet but maybe they do.

Question is do the cops have the authority to stop vehicles and drivers or is this something that only the traffic policemen can do? And if they don't have that authority then can drivers refuse to show them their licence or vehicle papers?

The normal cop (read as the crime cop) has more authority to stop any vehicle than the traffic cop, since the traffic cop is just upholding the traffic law whereas the crime cop is upholding several laws put together. Hope this helps.

[guyonblackybx]

Thx a ton for sharing, came to know somany things.
Naveen

[mrhap]

I wanted to know if anyone has an idea about the following-

What is the law in case of a private owner lending out his car to some one for driving for a day or two?Is it allowed?

Thanks

[Sahil]

Is it true that you can present a photocopy of your licence instead of the orignal when caught by the cops? Was told that you have upto 24hrs to present any legal document.
Usually cops try and get hold of your licence the minute they catch you so that the ball is in their court.

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by mrhap

I wanted to know if anyone has an idea about the following-

What is the law in case of a private owner lending out his car to some one for driving for a day or two?Is it allowed?

Thanks

It is allowed, provided, the other person has valid DL

[anonymous]

Originally Posted by Sahil

Is it true that you can present a photocopy of your licence instead of the orignal when caught by the cops? Was told that you have upto 24hrs to present any legal document.
Usually cops try and get hold of your licence the minute they catch you so that the ball is in their court.

You can show the photocopy but there are 2 conditions
1-These copies should be attested by gadgeted officer
2-Cops are not in good mood

[mrhap]

Originally Posted by rlather

It is allowed, provided, the other person has valid DL

I will explain in detail why i am asking this- Consider a situation wherein a private car operator gives out his car and driver for a tour purpose . The cops catch the driver and say that the car is being used as a taxi even though it does not have a taxi permit. Now can the tourists say that the car has been lent to them by a friend? What is the law?