[Aditya]

With the number of road accidents and fatalities on the rise, the Mumbai RTO has started taking steps to try and ensure that two-wheeler users wear helmets while riding.

If a two-wheeler is to be registered, the buyer has to give a declaration on oath that he will wear a helmet while riding. The seller has to submit an affidavit declaring that he has sold a helmet along with the two-wheeler. The RTO will not register the vehicle if the two documents are not submitted.

Those applying for two-wheeler licences are also required to submit an affidavit with a pledge to wear a helmet while riding. The candidate also has to ensure that the pillion rider wears a helmet. While the RTO is accepting these affidavits, the rule is not yet being implemented.

Under the new rules, the rider will be held responsible in the event of an accident and not the transport and traffic authorities.

The Mumbai RTO has also started counselling sessions for those found riding without helmets. Apart from paying a fine, offenders will have to sign an indemnity bond assuring the authorities that they will never forget to wear a helmet while riding a two-wheeler.

Source: Times of India Article 1 , Article 2

[nemesis86]

Atleast a step in the right direction in my opinion. The Helmet rule needs to be followed strictly for both the rider and the pillion.

In Mumbai, I have seen young riders zig-zaging the WEH with the helmet around their arms. They're surely gonna get a fracture should they fall from the bike.

On a different note, I liked the agv helmet in the illustration. Looks sweet.

[saket77]

Yes, a step forward. But not sure if it is going to help much. Most people do not wear a helmet not because they don't have one; but because they don't want to as it probably ruins their hair style and how riding without a helmet is a sign of bravery and being manly!!

And as Nemesis said - you can see most of the young lads carrying the helmets in their arms; hence availability of helmet is not the case. It is the will.

The only change can happen out of awareness. The concern for your own safety has to come from within. On the other hand, it is difficult to kill someone who is hell bent on committing a suicide.

Regards.

[aargee]

What I feel about this whole additional paper work is that, with the number of accidents on raise & the "raises" under the tables of RTO...

Originally Posted by Aditya

RTO is accepting these affidavits

to pass the buck to...

Originally Posted by Aditya

the rider will be held responsible in the event of an accident and not the transport and traffic authorities

This is probably because to safe guard RTO against court verdict or even an outcome of PIL that should point the inefficiency of RTO & cover up their corrupt practices to an extent

[Urban_Nomad]

I've said this before and I ll say it again, the concerned authorities first need to define what a helmet is. It should be protective (define standards / certifications), proper fitting (define proper fit) and should not include helmets / headgear intended for other purposes (list exclusions)

Till such time, this is just another half baked effort that will not make road users any safer

[ariesonu]

About a month back, I was on my way to Marol via Aarey and there was supposedly some police cops rally on bikes on that day. The barrage of bikes coming from Powai end were mix of Police cops & Traffic cops. Barring one traffic officer, I did not see any police officer wearing helmet and even sighted about half a dozen bikes with triple cop riders.
Now who will tame these IDIOTS.

Regards-Sonu

[Engine_Roars]

I am not sure how filing an affidavit is going to help this cause. This looks more like a " Ball is in your court" kind of a step to me. This could be of some help only if, the declaration has something like "If I meet with an accident, and I am not wearing helmet, I can not claim my insurance" . Money, the only thing most of us Indians, care about. Hit, where it hurts. Simple.

[PratikPatel]

This has to be one of the funniest things that I have heard in recent times . How is any of this even legal? Is the bond even enforceable? What if someone else is using the vehicle? Even if I sign such a undertaking how is the government even going to enforce it.

Add to that there is one undertaking asking me to buy a helmet every time I buy a new bike. What if I already have a helmet (I have 5 of them, but that is different matter)? I still need to buy a new one?

To think we pay our taxes so that someone is being paid to come up with such half baked ideas .

[Vishyvish]

I can't get the right word, or too many words coming up for this yet not implemented rule!
Wonder where they are going to store these declarations, and whether it would be traceable when required. Intentions are good, to ensure everyone owning a two wheeler buys a helmet, but what we need is enforcing the rule. Sadly, enforcement is only seen during month ends or when you have an upright officer who sticks by the rules. You bet, have seen one who spared no one.
You see more helmets hanging on the handle bar than those on the head. Yet, a lot more under the seat, which signifies what they feel the true value of their heads are!!!

[sajusherief]

It's a good move, but the rule can be misused as well. I won't be surprised if the seller starts selling cheap helmets at ridiculous prices quoting that the RTO demands it(some what similar like the gas agency selling poor quality gas stoves at MRP). As a sequel the RTO even might launch a checking campaign to see whether people are using RTO issued helmets

[sawnilrules]

It's really sad to that people don't see value in wearing helmets even after knowing how bad roads in and around Mumbai are. Looks like a good initiative by the RTO, but I have my reservations on what exactly are the end results they are aiming at by doing this.

I bought a bike a week back, and I was quite surprised when I signed the declaration form. But it was not in form of any affidavit as mentioned here. It was simple form printed on RTO letter-head where the only details I had to fill were my name, the bike that I have taken and my signature, rest of the material was pre-printed.

Remains to be seen, what happens with the forms that are being filled.

[latentpotential]

Originally Posted by sajusherief

...As a sequel the RTO even might launch a checking campaign to see whether people are using RTO issued helmets

This is not really possible, as it is the prerogative of the www.bis.org.in There will not be any overlap on this. The RTO does not define the standards, it must enforce the standards as laid out in the relevant laws only.

Additional thought: What if auto & medical insurance cos. require you to sign a waiver form if you get in to an incident and are not wearing a helmet or seat belts? Hopefully at least a few people will get pushed to be safe. Also will this hold true in law?

[ghodlur]

A good move by the RTO taking into account the increasing 2 wheeler accidents. Signing of a declaration is a hoax and does not assure that the rider will wear the helmet. In addition this has increased 2 wheeler dealer high handedness in selling the helmets at an exorbitant cost.

Putting a clause in the Insurance of claim refusal in case of non usage of helmets will be beneficial.

OT: Every Saturday and Sunday mornings between 9.30 am to 11.30 am (only) on the Ghodbunder Road the traffic cops pull up 2 wheeler riders for non usage of helmets when driving at few known signals. For all other days its free.

[blackwasp]

Originally Posted by Aditya

With the number of road accidents and fatalities on the rise, the Mumbai RTO has started taking steps to try and ensure that two-wheeler users wear helmets while riding.

If a two-wheeler is to be registered, the buyer has to give a declaration on oath that he will wear a helmet while riding. The seller has to submit an affidavit declaring that he has sold a helmet along with the two-wheeler. The RTO will not register the vehicle if the two documents are not submitted.

Rather than improving traffic /road conditions, this is being done to wash off their responsibility. Legal experts please explain about the validity of this declaration. What happens if a person wearing a helmet who has signed such a declaration meets with an accident due to a pothole ?

Originally Posted by saket77

Yes, a step forward. But not sure if it is going to help much. Most people do not wear a helmet not because they don't have one; but because they don't want to as it probably ruins their hair style and how riding without a helmet is a sign of bravery and being manly!!
Regards.

+1 to that. I think the to change this attitude, the society should start singling out people that don't wear helmets, seat belts etc. Nothing matters to the Indian public more than what their neighbour thinks of them.

Originally Posted by Engine_Roars

I am not sure how filing an affidavit is going to help this cause. This looks more like a " Ball is in your court" kind of a step to me. This could be of some help only if, the declaration has something like "If I meet with an accident, and I am not wearing helmet, I can not claim my insurance" . Money, the only thing most of us Indians, care about. Hit, where it hurts. Simple.

Yes, if insurance people start adding clause that "without a proper helmet, no insurance will be given", most people will start wearing a helmet

Originally Posted by PratikPatel

This has to be one of the funniest things that I have heard in recent times. How is any of this even legal? Is the bond even enforceable? What if someone else is using the vehicle? Even if I sign such a undertaking how is the government even going to enforce it.

Add to that there is one undertaking asking me to buy a helmet every time I buy a new bike. What if I already have a helmet (I have 5 of them, but that is different matter)? I still need to buy a new one?

To think we pay our taxes so that someone is being paid to come up with such half baked ideas .

Unfortunately, this is one of those half-baked ideas that just hurts the person who follows all the rules.

Originally Posted by sajusherief

It's a good move, but the rule can be misused as well. I won't be surprised if the seller starts selling cheap helmets at ridiculous prices quoting that the RTO demands it(some what similar like the gas agency selling poor quality gas stoves at MRP). As a sequel the RTO even might launch a checking campaign to see whether people are using RTO issued helmets

Now will I be stopped because my helmet doesn't meet ISI/BIS standards? Or that the RTO did not issue it ? Mine is a DOT / ECE certified helmet. This will just lead to further harassment !

[GTO]

If motorcyclists don't wear helmets, the primary blame lies with them - NOT the RTO. Only an idiot would ride without safety gear, especially on Indian roads where disaster is waiting to happen at every junction.

I'm surprised at the scepticism displayed by BHPians. It's a great move in my opinion. Signing that declaration can serve as a serious reminder of the helmet rule to bike owners. It also ensures that each motorcycle is sold with a helmet.

Equally, I believe the only way foolish helmetless riders will wear one is by strict enforcement. But that shouldn't take away from the fact that this is a step in the right direction. Every little bit helps.