[revvharder]

Looks like an order has been passed regarding this in Delhi.

[adi.mariner]

I was fined for the same (Rs. 500) at the Alka Talkies signal when I was travelling with my Wife and kids. I didn't argue because my wife wasn't wearing a mask. There was a lady on a Scooter travelling alone in front. She was also fined for the same.

[Bibendum90949]

I too had believed there's no logic in wearing a mask when we're driving solo with the windows rolled up, but I realised it's folly. Imagine this - we may stop to fuel and may have to roll down windows a bit to interact with the fuel attendant. If we weren't wearing mask inside the car all the while, it means that person may end up breathing the trapped exhaled air in our car which start to escape out as we roll down the windows. So there's rational in wearing a mask even if we're driving solo, whether it's a rule or not. In that sense, someone outside our car can be endangered too.

[Zen2001]

Originally Posted by Bibendum90949

I too had believed there's no logic in wearing a mask when we're driving solo with the windows rolled up, but I realised it's folly. Imagine this - we may stop to fuel and may have to roll down windows a bit to interact with the fuel attendant. If we weren't wearing mask inside the car all the while, it means that person may end up breathing the trapped exhaled air in our car which start to escape out as we roll down the windows. So there's rational in wearing a mask even if we're driving solo, whether it's a rule or not. In that sense, someone outside our car can be endangered too.

If you're in the vicinity (within 6 feet) of another person and both are not wearing masks, then provided neither coughs, sneezes or shouts loudly (creating aerosols), the risk is considered very low even for a duration of 5-10 minutes. That's what studies of transmission looking into airstream direction flows have concluded and this is also what the CDC says on scenarios of risk of exposure. You're being too paranoid.

[Bibendum90949]

I was just trying to indicate the technicality of how another person outside the car can be at risk too when we don't wear masks as we drive solo. Yes Doc, I agree to all your points of the circumstances that can lead to exposure.

Instead of refuelling scenario, let's consider if one drives the car without the mask and taking it to a car washing service or to the service centre. Wouldn't the attendant who enter your car to move it to the washing/service bay is at risk because the owner has been driving the car without a mask and may have sneezed , coughed or even talked loudly over phone and the aerosols may have settled on the steering wheel or any other part the other guy may end up touching. That's the premise I was trying to justify on the rational of wearing a mask even if we're driving solo.

[frewper]

Originally Posted by SS-Traveller

Look at it from the policeman's point of view. His job is to enforce the rule about wearing masks, and he's been briefed to issue x number of challans as part of his patrolling duties. He cannot determine whether you are getting into your car, or riding in the car with your spouse / sibling or just a hitchhiker. He is not asking you to wear an N95 mask, so you can wear a surgical or homemade cotton mask to feel comfortable, yet not be challaned. The policeman doesn't care if the mask is below your nose, or has a little hole where your mouth is.

I can't fathom why the policeman's point of view is important when all he cares about is fulfilling his quota for the day and have to fine anyone he wishes to. Like I said there was no one near me, for atleast 50 metres in either direction. Thats a total of 100 meteres with no human around. How on earth am I going to spread the virus if i have had it and to whom? Aerosols don't last for so long that someone who comes there even after 5 mins, will get it from me. I think after all these months there is enough data that suggests how the virus spread.

If the policeman needs to be excused for doing his duty and fulfilling his quota requirement, maybe we should all stop complaining if our service advisor overcharges us for servicing or replaces parts which dont need replacing. Or when hospitals falsely scare unsuspecting patients into doing expensive tests when there was actually no need for doing so. After all they are just doing their duty and fulfilling their quotas. We should do our part and payup for all of these.

I expect the policeman to do his job properly. I can go to any place today where there is a crowd, ex: a market and see scores of people not wearing a mask, I am pretty sure no cop will have a problem fulfilling their quotas for the day.

Originally Posted by SS-Traveller

At the end of the day, a mask is like a seat belt. Wear it properly for your own safety, or wear it without care about clipping it on properly, just to avoid a challan. You might say that you unhooked the seat belt in crawling traffic because you aren't endangering yourself, but a cop will still challan you when you are at a complete stop at a traffic light, if he notices you without the belt in place.

Cant really compare these two, but lets see how this law can be misused.
Well if the car is moving at a snails speed the seatbelt has to be worn. Its in the law and also common sense that even at the speed of 10km\hr, I can be injured if I meet with an accident. But if I have parked my car and the engine is switched off and I am sitting in the car waiting for someone, most probably I will remove my seatbelt and sit. Now If a cop comes by and asks me to pay a fine for not wearing a seatbelt because I am sitting in the car, then I will call it an absurdity and misuse of law.

Originally Posted by moralfibre

Here's my counter point of view:

Let's compare this with the use of helmets. Would you also not wear a helmet if the neighbourhood has zero traffic? Should the policeman give you a leeway for not wearing one just because there is no traffic.

Again I cant see how this compares. But lets see this in a different light just as the seatbelt point. Also I am always big on safety and I have always worn a helmet since I was 17. Have never ridden without one when I go to the grocery store.
Lets say I am sitting on the bike, engine switched off, just waiting for someone; the helmet is normally resting on the tank of the bike. If a cop were to fine me for that, then thats wrong. If the bike if moving with the engine ON, helmet has to be worn

Originally Posted by moralfibre

In principle I agree that you were in an open space without much risk in your view but it was still a violation of the order issued.

Yes. But the thing that I want to highlight is this creates a negative image of the cops to someone like me who like many others voluntarily wear a mask and are always extra careful. If I am in a place where there are other people and not wearing a mask please fine me. I will even apologise after paying the fine. But dont unnecessarily fine me when I am at a place where there isnt a soul around within a 50 mtr radius. If they really cared about implemeting the law, they would go to a crowded place, than find me on a deserted residential road.

Originally Posted by DCEite

Law is law. There is no use of arguing on the basis of common sense or uncommon sense.

Well a law is made out of common sense isnt it? The law was made so that we reduce the spread of disease in public (which means people present). I agree I am outside of my private space, but still there isnt a soul around.

Originally Posted by DCEite

Sorry if i sound rude but if i were in your place i would have paid the fine without any questions asked.

But you dint pay any fine did you? There will always be a brief moment during the day when you are outside and you removed your mask for a second. Image someone hopping out taking a picture and asking you to pay a fine. I would say that would be wrong because you inteneded to wear a mask always but you removed it just for a second maybe to adjust it a little. We are all humans, its just natural that we may be without a mask for a brief moment, doesnt mean that we are being ignorant of the current situation.

Originally Posted by saket77

I’m aware of such incidents. The administration sometimes is working like a hardwired equipment or a badly written program with no logic. And I tell you, it is going to be useless and waste of your time arguing with them. So, even if I may look like an idiot, I put on the mask while driving alone in the car; not for this particular virus but for some select.

Regards.

Yes I do agree. I guess people have been taught to follow things without asking. And if someone asks why, theres no answer.

Originally Posted by RedTerrano

Few days back, I was pulled over by the cops, when was driving in my car (windows rolled up, A/c on) with my wife, for not wearing masks. I showed them the masks we were carrying and pointed out again, she is my wife, but they didnt relent.
In the end paid 500/- fine and got receipt for the same.

After seeing all the good as well as bad things happen since the virus has landed on our shores, I have given up thinking.
Ours not to reason why, ours but to listen and comply.
(Sorry Tennyson)

From now on I will be wearing a mask in my car even if I am driving alone.

Even I have started doing the same, while some who still roam around without any masks in public are not fined because they are not soft targets.

Originally Posted by Zen2001

And I sympathize with you. If this was May end or June, the police would be far to scared to even approach a car to check why it's on the road! But now a new law has given them a new energy. All of us know about the saying about putting a weapon in the hands of a monkey.
Why, in May, a policeman had actually called me up asking for an explanation as to why he shouldn't slap section 188 of the epidemic act on one of my patient who was traveling from his village to consult with me at a tertiary care hospital, just because he didn't believe him!

Yeah guess they have to make the money back for all the lost months. This new law is a money machine for them now. I sympathize with you for being threatened for doing your job and taking care of your patients during these hard times. Some here may think the cop is doing his duty by threatening you, but we all need to see the bigger picture and work together. Thanks doc.

[GTO]

Rules are rules, dude, and they must always be in black & white when dealing with the public at large. You thought it's okay not to wear because there was no one around. Your neighbour might think it's cool to be mask-less because the nearest person is 50 feet away. Someone else might think it's okay not to wear a mask because he is in a group of 8, but they are all family and live together. While yet someone else just recovered from Covid and is hence not wearing a mask.

Too much confusion. Better to have it solid = when you are out of the house, you have to wear a mask .

[Night Raven]

My colleague who is a consultant neonatologist was warned by a policeman at a traffic signal for not wearing a mask. He was driving alone in his car on the way to the hospital. An argument followed, my colleague didn't relent and finally the policeman let him go. As for me, I wear a mask the moment I get out of my building gate. When I travel with my wife, I insist that she also should wear one or at least have it around her neck or chin like most politicians do. I know it doesn't make sense but I hate wasting time arguing with a policeman

[Zen2001]

Originally Posted by GTO

Rules are rules, dude, and they must always be in black & white when dealing with the public at large.

Too much confusion. Better to have it solid = when you are out of the house, you have to wear a mask .

Agreed that a mask should be worn while OUTSIDE in a PUBLIC place. What an absurdity to force anyone (who is not coughing/sneezing/otherwise a risk for others/risk to himself - in which case such a person FIRSTLY should not be outside) to wear a mask or any excuse for a mask, when alone in a car or with someone they live with in the same house anyway. The mask can always be worn before opening the door and getting out of the car - fine them then if no mask.
You see, laws should take into account the proven medical facts of VIABLE TRANSMISSION (not hypothetical) on this subject (& any other technical fact on any other subject) before being framed. Otherwise, this is similar to the British imposing archaic and draconian laws on us 100 years ago just to fill their treasury.
And on the scientific basis - masks do not offer any additional protection when worn by people who do not have upper respiratory systems or an ILI. Advocated only if the above are present or if there is going to be CLOSE person to person interaction, without physical distancing (& not just exchanging a casual greeting for a minute). Physical distancing and hand hygiene are far superior preventive measures. Besides, a lay person who is otherwise unaccustomed to mask use and understanding of fomite transmission is at a risk of accidentally infecting himself while repeatedly touching his face while adjusting the mask, which otherwise would have not happened.

For more reading , especially the last line : https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/...t-to-know-now/

Originally Posted by frewper

Yeah guess they have to make the money back for all the lost months. This new law is a money machine for them now. I sympathize with you for being threatened for doing your job and taking care of your patients during these hard times. Some here may think the cop is doing his duty by threatening you, but we all need to see the bigger picture and work together. Thanks doc.

I was so irritated, I told the policeman to come to the hospital if he had the guts to do so and check the truth for himself. (This was in May, during the lockdown) Call disconnected and patient arrives 10 minutes later. Sometimes you have to speak on the only way they understand.

[Sanjunair5]

About 10 years back, while in US, I was stopped by a police on an absolutely deserted street. He asked me if I knew why I was being stopped. I said I didn't know. He smiled and said that makes it even more dangerous and pointed me to a Stop Sign some distance behind me that I should have stopped at. What did I do then? I politely agreed to my mistake, he ticketed me ($158 and it pinched me very hard!) and we both went our ways. While in my mind I felt I was being wronged (there is no traffic around, that stop sign should not have been there etc. etc.), I knew rules are rules, I was clearly the one on the wrong side and arguing or negotiating with a cop who was doing his job was not teh right thing to do.

Now imagine if the same was to happen in India? The same me would have tried to put up an argument in front of the cop, telling him there is nobody on the road, there is no need for a stop sign at that place, blah blah.

The point I am trying to make is, many of us in India feel that we can interpret rules accordingly to our conveniences. That is wrong. If at all we feel we are being wronged and it needs to be contested, it has to be done at the court of law (almost all of these challans can be easily contested in courts) and not with the cop who is doing his job. And I am not defending all the cops, but in this case the cop seems to be doing the right thing.

[Altocumulus]

Originally Posted by frewper

I can't fathom why the policeman's point of view is important when all he cares about is fulfilling his quota for the day and have to fine anyone he wishes to. Like I said there was no one near me, for atleast 50 metres in either direction. Thats a total of 100 meteres with no human around. How on earth am I going to spread the virus if i have had it and to whom? Aerosols don't last for so long that someone who comes there even after 5 mins, will get it from me. I think after all these months there is enough data that suggests how the virus spread.

Why are you discounting the policemen as human, and only consider your neighbors as one ? They did ride upto you but you still had your mask in your hand. Am sure you were not speaking to them from 50m afar.

That's the main idea behind wearing a mask when you are outside your home. Anyone can walk upto you/ past you or pass through the same place as you after 10 seconds and vice versa. It's not that they are asking you to go to war. Wearing a mask drastically brings down the chances of infection, thats a fact. So why not just do it for your's as well as other's safety.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by Night Raven

When I travel with my wife, I insist that she also should wear one or at least have it around her neck or chin like most politicians do.

Absolutely, the cops are not checking if it makes sense, they are just checking what they have been told to check- does this person have a mask? If not, use the opportunity to meet your targets and make up for lost revenue. The rule may have been framed with transmission prevention in mind, but like all our rules it gets interpreted differently by the enforcers on the ground. This is just reality whether it's covid-related rules or traffic-related rules, especially since the enforcers are the same people in this case! If you are a VIP, your convoy can break a red light, you do not have to wear a mask (how many ministers have been shown in the media without masks, even organizing mass gatherings?). If you belong to the upper-middle class section (like most of us in this forum), you get fined. If you belong to the lower socioeconomic section, you get the lathi. Let us be grateful we're not.

Originally Posted by Night Raven

I know it doesn't make sense but I hate wasting time arguing with a policeman.

Certainly, especially during this time. The unfortunate cops are forced to interact with so many people daily, there is a high chance they will catch the virus during the course of their duties. For that reason at least, it makes sense to avoid prolonged interaction such as arguing with a cop and limit your exposure.


I sympathize with the OP, I certainly echo his sentiments. But IMHO, better to take a practical approach to these things when the reality of enforcement is what it is.

Originally Posted by Zen2001

If you're in the vicinity (within 6 feet) of another person and both are not wearing masks, then provided neither coughs, sneezes or shouts loudly (creating aerosols), the risk is considered very low even for a duration of 5-10 minutes.

Originally Posted by Zen2001

And on the scientific basis - masks do not offer any additional protection when worn by people who do not have upper respiratory systems or an ILI. Advocated only if the above are present or if there is going to be CLOSE person to person interaction, without physical distancing (& not just exchanging a casual greeting for a minute).

Thank you doc for posting this information. I've said this before, but again, the most useful posts on any of the covid-related threads have been from the doctors! Thank you for bringing the scientific information to these discussions. (Those should really be the only things that count, but as this pandemic has clearly shown, we really don't live in a science-minded society .)

[Zen2001]

Originally Posted by Bibendum90949

I was just trying to indicate the technicality of how another person outside the car can be at risk too when we don't wear masks as we drive solo. Yes Doc, I agree to all your points of the circumstances that can lead to exposure.

Instead of refuelling scenario, let's consider if one drives the car without the mask and taking it to a car washing service or to the service centre. Wouldn't the attendant who enter your car to move it to the washing/service bay is at risk because the owner has been driving the car without a mask and may have sneezed , coughed or even talked loudly over phone and the aerosols may have settled on the steering wheel or any other part the other guy may end up touching. That's the premise I was trying to justify on the rational of wearing a mask even if we're driving solo.

Maybe if you're driving with the intention of handing over your car to another person or picking up another person on the way, both of who might touch the surfaces and breathe the same air, you should wear a mask. Although droplets that you might have aerosolized by coughing, sneezing, talking etc WILL NOT harbour viable virus as soon as 2-3 minutes after coming in contact with any inanimate dry surface - a car's interior is a much more harsh evironment for viral survival (given exposure to sun and heat - even 40°C for a minute will do) than an indoor surface such as a metal doorknob. One of the most hardy viruses - Hep B virus - also gets killed by mere drying - corona viruses are much more sensitive and labile.
What's most important for the others who touch your car is to wash their hands before touching their face. Conversely, with someone else touching the same surfaces of the car that you will touch later (as happens after interior cleaning), what will protect you more than your mask is washing your own hands, even if they HAVE WORN their mask. What's even surer than this? Avoid being into these situations knowingly.... aka distancing! Cleaning your own car is 100% safe - for you and for your cleaner! 😅

[Vasuki]

Originally Posted by frewper

I The law says if one person is the car he can not wear the mask. But what if two family members are travelling together? Nothing has been said about that and the cops are making merry charging fines from people who live in the same house.

Originally Posted by saket77

So, even if I may look like an idiot, I put on the mask while driving alone in the car; not for this particular virus but for some select.

Originally Posted by moralfibre

In principle I agree that you were in an open space without much risk in your view but it was still a violation of the order issued.

According to a Supreme Court ruling, A car driven on a public road can be considered as a public place. That's why it is necessary to wear mask as the current law state you've to wear mask in the public place. The Police is well within right to fine you, if you are not wearing the mask in public places.

Reasoning, we are travelling with family(same house) is not practical, how can cops verify this claim?

Supreme Court Ruling :: Link

[Seenz]

Just to be clear in the starting of this post, this is coming from someone who is on the other side of the law (implementation side).
As per my understanding, law has to be implemented in the context of the situations. Law is not black and white as per my opinion. I had Law as optional subject during my exam preparation. Still I am no expert in law matters and I would leave it to law practicing BHPians to correct me if my understanding is wrong.

Indian law is based on some simple principles of natural justice, one of them being “Let a hundred guilty be acquitted, but one innocent should not be convicted”. Further in many Acts, you may find the use of a word ‘proper officer’. The word proper officer has been used by lawmakers so that the officer filing chargesheet or framing charges, has proper training and professional competence to scrutinise and peruse the facts of the matter on its merits, not on the whims or feeling of suspicion of the officer. The officer should have reasonable doubt and suspicion about the law being broken before he can start taking action and levying fine, etc. In OP’s case, he was in possession of a mask to be wore in case he encountered public activity. It is anyone’s guess how the Police Inspector found OP to be a citizen at risk of spreading pandemic in the society.

I would like you all to think along the lines of whether the Police Inspector in OP’s case is a proper officer to frame charges or levy fine. The last I checked Police were not given training for functioning as an epidemiologist, virologist or fluid dynamics professional who could opine on the viral load spreading activities of the general public. There are many questions that can arise from these circumstances:-

1. Whether OP had any intention to deliberately infect his surroundings with viral load and cause harm to his fellow citizens?
2. How did the Police Inspector come to the conclusion that OP was a threat to the society at large and liable to be prosecuted under the Pandemic Act?
3. Did the residential area where OP was apprehended had high enough public activity to warrant patrolling by police?
4. Was the OP found deliberately sneezing, exhibiting symptoms of viral infection or boasting to someone being covid positive and had intent to spread the virus to whomsoever came in contact with him?
5. If the OP did not have a soul around him for 50 metres, why did the Police Inspector by coming in close contact with the OP indulged in potential spread of infection to him and his junior from the OP or vice-versa?

There can be many arguments and counter arguments like this. And I know from the detail oriented nature of the BHPians that they would certainly be able to punch many holes in my line of thought. However I request my fellow learned members to get into the underlying cause of the whole matter. The issue lies with the state and its implementing arm stepping into the civil rights of the citizens. Every citizen has been granted The Right to Live with dignity by the Constitution of India. The state has no power to behave with OP like a criminal when he has not done any wrong. Such high handedness should certainly be discouraged by an informative forum like ours.

This is one of the hare brained or knee jerk reactions of the Government like the use of the Aarogya Setu App. I wonder where all the data analytics and whole shebang of identifying hotspots before they emerge has vanished now. The Government in case of Aarogya Setu knew that it could not make it mandatory for the citizens as India is a democracy, not one party government like our dragon neighbours. The other main issue is that the Government is as clueless as us regarding the steps to be taken. During elections, they were not asked what action would they take in case of a pandemic spreading like wildfire in India.

I would like to cite a simple example of Goa. Goa was being called the state which has defeated the pandemic in its tracks and heaps of praises were being sung about the tenacity and preparedness of the administration in the battle against corona virus. Goa had one of the most serious lockdowns of any state in India. Till August 31st, Goa did not allow any outsider to enter Goa without being home quarantined for 14 days or taking a RT-PCR Test for Rs. 2000. Tourists and any other visitors, even taxi drivers to drop passengers were not being allowed to enter Goa. In the first week of September, GST revenue figures for the month of August 2020 of all states in India were out. The GST Revenue of Goa declined the most in all of the states i.e. by a whopping 34%. Suddenly the Government changed their narrative and now all and sundry without any restrictions are allowed to enter Goa. Goa Government is actively calling the tourists to visit the state now. The tourists are probably not coming for a long time due to antics of the Government from past many years. Tourism has been on a wane in Goa from the past 2 or 3 years due to circumstances which need discussion in its separate thread.

I always say that India is a vibrant democracy and we get the Government we deserve.