1. Introducing the smashing new Team FIAT T-Shirt !! To order yours click here : Team FIAT T-Shirt

"From Friday, any tinted film on car windows will be illegal" - Supreme Court

Discussion in 'Non FIAT Cars and two wheelers' started by Rituraj, May 2, 2012.

  1. dharmesh

    dharmesh

    Messages:
    54
    mumbai
    Found this AD on one of the news paper few days back. These people advertising sunfilms as if everything is legal and there is no issue in using the same. And shockingly I have seen the AD of VKool sunfilms in theatres as well in intervals and before movie starts.

    13072012251.jpg
  2. ramjn

    ramjn Staff Member Janitor

    Messages:
    5,243
    Chennai
    Linea 1.3
    The ad is not for sun control or tint films, it is only for the heat control ;).
  3. dharmesh

    dharmesh

    Messages:
    54
    mumbai
    Then what is the difference between those?:confused:
  4. sungoa2010

    sungoa2010

    Messages:
    2,878
    Goa
    One can take the vehicle only at night. The sun had already disappeared so no question of controlling sun arise and only moon is left. There is no ban on moon control films.
    1 person likes this.
  5. jumu

    jumu Superiore

    Messages:
    969
    Chennai
    If heat is the issue and cooling is the requirement , then those films are the right appendage for vehicles. The rest of the shade stuff is for buildings.

    Abdul
  6. but as per rules, no attachment to the windshield or window glasses is permissible. so be it heat control or sun control or moon control, everything is banned.
  7. sungoa2010

    sungoa2010

    Messages:
    2,878
    Goa
    There has been a lot of posts criticizing the order in this forum and sometimes even questioning the validity if the order. As a citizen living in India it is not unnatural if someone get that kind of feeling, because we see in our daily life a clear polarization between what is written and what is practiced under the nose of personals starting from police constables to Ministers. So our law/judiciary has not succeeded in giving a confidence to their citizens about their strength. If it were true our elected representatives would not have come with criminal backgrounds like murder, rape etc. It is this lack of confidence in judiciary than the disrespect for judiciary.

    I have gone through the report of the judgment carefully. What I could now understand is the following.
    1. Now there is no scope for modifying this rule by a petition because the rule itself has some vagueness that gives many interpretations. And the court has taken the stand that they have to consider the majority of the public interest at the coast of minority interest. Their interpretation is that whatever the VLT specification given is for the manufacturer. He can use it to its maximum permissible level or he can use it to the lowest level. It is not the job of curt to test it. Court will assume that it is at the permitted maximum level. So anything additional will violate the rule which is not permissible. Their stand is that it is the vehicle manufacturers and film manufacturers who had misinterpreted the rule. They have reacted when someone pointed out the violation to them.

    2. Now profit or loss of film makers is not a issue to court since they come under interest of minority. Now only thing that can challenge the order for an amendment is through legislation is the health concern which reflects the majority.

    3. There is a provision in the act for VIPs and VVIPs to use the black class which has to be decided by a security committee. But I am sure that a police inspectors and constables cannot use such cars and what we have reported in our thread have gone under such procedures. Here I am pasting the relevant portion

    24. Another issue that has been raised in the present Writ Petition is that certain VIPs/VVIPs are using black films on their vehicles for security reasons. Even this practice is not supported by law, as no notification by the competent authority has been brought to our notice, giving exemption to such vehicles from the operation of Rule 100 or any of its provisions. Be that as it may, we do not wish to enter upon the arena of the security and safety measures when the police department and Home Ministry consider such exemption appropriate. The cases of the persons who have been provided with Z and Z+ security category may be considered by a Committee consisting of the Director General of Police/Commissioner of Police of the concerned State and the Home Secretary of that State/Centre. It will be for that Committee to examine such cases for grant of exemption in accordance with law and upon due application of mind. These certificates should be provided only in relation to official cars of VIPs/VVIPs, depending upon the category of security that such person has been awarded by the competent authority. The appropriate government is free to make any regulations that it may consider appropriate in this regard.

    4. Now in future the manufacturers can manufacture vehicles with maximum allowed value to save us from heat. May be we will see some top model come with premium UV protection glasses. That is the only way left. Some vehicle manufactures might have already started this thought.

    5. We the unfortunates have to forget our money and obey the order to become the good citizens.

    6. The rule also didn’t keep any scope for curtains or anything that block VLT. May be one can use it while parking the vehicle. Black film is one such candidate and center of issue since it widely used.

    7. As I told already it is one of the interpretations. They could have temporarily allowed the films which doesn’t violate the VLT factor. But they didn’t take it for the majority. Cancer patients, feeding mothers, women night drivers etc are minority according to court.

    The problem with our judiciary structure is that they now transfer the job to police. Whether they are implemented or not they are not bothered. They will react if someone file a complaint. If the complaint is against some influential person then they will act. But such cases are rare since the influential person will have his own private police who will break the bone of the petitioner. If the petitioner can even survive that with broken bones he can believe that he got justice till his next bone breaks.

    So let us remove the black films(Black? It should be semitransparent, black is something which blocks 100 %lights and the driver will not even see anything on road. I am not understanding why they use the term in a legal document) and enjoy our ride. Plant more trees, get natural shade. Next time when eat a mango don’t throw the seeds dig a hole on and drop it there. It may grow and give natural shade. By that time we can hope that our courts will succeed in eradicating all evil elements from the society. Let us hope for the best. Let us also hope that our Fiat will bring a 1.6 MJD and we will have great fun without tinted glass.
    4 people like this.
  8. The hearing of the 5 PIL's yesterday again ended upon no conclusion . The judges told that the Motor Act explains about visibility percentage but no where mentions anything about pasting anything upon the glass. They have asked for some time for advice's from panel's & the next date of hearing is 25th July,2012 .

    Source: https://www.facebook.com/movementagainstsc
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2012
  9. mayank

    mayank Amatore

  10. ramjn

    ramjn Staff Member Janitor

    Messages:
    5,243
    Chennai
    Linea 1.3
    No idea. I think the judgement is reserved again.

Share This Page