Compulsory wearing of safety helmets and abolition of alcoholic drinks sales.
rashmiramanath
(Querist) 23 February 2009
This query is : Resolved
Respected counselors/solicitors
Can anybody clarify for the following with authentic justification clearly.
The Motor Vehicles act has been amended and orders passed regarding wearing of helmets with a view to avoid head injuries and fatal accidents in our country.
but, as this is a social issue and if anybody questions this, the answer will be for the cause of safety and welfare, everyone should follow it.
but, on the same scenerio,the after effects of alcoholic drinks and their regular consumption has led to detirioration of hundred and thousands of families from peaceful life to rugs and beggarhood.
can"t someone file a suitable petition or litigation in this regard and get orders that as this is a social issue which can cause negative effects to society and because of provision of sales and availability, people are consuming alcohokl and other intoxicating drinks.
If the government considers wearing of helmets saves life although other issues arise such as proper road maintenance.proper road traffic rules and acts, good system of traffic signaling network,proper and adequate humps etc.
moreover, in cities, due to larger and heavy congested traffic, people cannot go
more than 40kms speed within city limits .
considering all these factors if anybody can file a PIL sand fight for it in such a way that as people know the after effects of alcoholic drinks and its consumption along with government, the same is being left to the will and wish of society and its members.
in the same way, the usage of helmets can also be left to the will and wish of riders and compulsory road improvement, traffic signal system technical up gradation etc can be applied so that the society can be free from this compulsion of wearing helmets.
this has served only the helmet manufacturers lobby and has given them good profit and the so called elected bodies viz;MLA and MP some large source of finance.
i request to the experts to kindly give your genuine/practical views so that a PIL can be filed and won for the cause of good will of society.
requesting and expecting your earliest reply.
thanks and best regards
Rashmiramanath
B.B.R.Goud.
(Expert) 23 February 2009
it is not possible to escape to comply the safety provisions under M V Act and corresponding Acts & Rules, unless through the legislation alone, which is very difficult, which again is against the public welfare and violation of Art 21 to which extent the state has to comply.
rashmiramanath
(Querist) 23 February 2009
Ok sir
but, if the helmets are for a public welfare cause and this is only for a faction of people who drive two wheelers.
this is by statistics very less when compared to a large percentage of people who consume alcohol and become addicted to the drinks.this affects the family members welfare also.then this can also be compulsorily banned if at all government is interested really for public welfare and healthy society.
then only the double standards of governments in viewing helmet safety usage and alcoholic drinks ban measure can be clarified.
my question is that can anyone fight legally for the same as a public measure.this can also be done by overwhelming support from many social organisations.
if the case is not considered for banning of production and sale of alcoholic drinks, then the same can be applied for removal of compulsion of wearing helmets.
please clarify.
thanking one and all
RashmiRamanath
A. A. JOSE
(Expert) 24 February 2009
I fully endorse Mr.Palnitkar's view.
M. PIRAVI PERUMAL
(Expert) 24 February 2009
I AGREE WITH THE VIEWS OF MY LEARNED FRIENDS.
Guest
(Expert) 24 February 2009
Helmets are very necessary things for two-wheeler riders because head is sensitive and prone part if accident occurs. It should be made compulsory for even pilion rider (including women and sikhs) also.
Prohibition is also important and drinking is a social evil. The Government does not prohibit on two grounds: It is giving enormous revenue to the state and corruption is there in giving contracts to liquor lobby. In some States,i.e., Gujarat, A.P. and T.N., the State experimented and failed to implement because, people who developed habits started to take harmful country made liquors. Finally, States gave up.
The Courts in PIL won't intervene by saying that it is a Government Policy. There are other valid grounds also for not prohibiting the drinks.
The remedy lies some where else. The powerful women's movements seen in A.P. in the past and presently in Jharkhand against the hard drinks are proper method. Unfortunately, when women's organisations rose up to the occasion, the most prominent political parties, i.e., Congress, BJP etc. did not support for that movement due to vested interests. The women's organisations movement supported by social organisations may bring some positive result in this direction.
Prabhakar
sanjeev murthy desai
(Expert) 24 February 2009
I agree with above views and
helment compulsory and drink and drive is very diferent from each other.
One is saving our life another one is problem of his self and public also.
helthy drinking is not a any harmful but after the drink and drive is an offence under MV Act.
