NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) -- filed by internationally acclaimed diabetic specialist and researcher - seeking effective implementation and enforcement of mandatory seat belt usage, child restraint systems and first-aid kits in vehicles.
"The fact that there are adequate laws for mandatory compliance with safety measures, including safety belts, etc., while vehicle is in motion, is hardly disputable. Non-compliance by passengers or failure of law-enforcing agencies is essentially question of maintenance of law and order," said a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
The bench also granted liberty to the petitioner to forward a copy of his petition to Ministry of Road Transport and Highways for consideration of his recommendations.
The court also observed existing laws already provide for mandatory compliance with safety measures. .
The PIL was filed by Dr Jothydev Kesavadev of Kerala, described by the bench as internationally acclaimed diabetic specialist and researcher with around over 300 publications.
His concern was heightened by the attitude he encountered among some drivers. Recalling some incident where he asked the taxi driver why seat belt wasn't working, driver answered, "Don't worry sir, don't worry. Seat belt is required only in front seat."
Kesavadev said the concern was not limited to seat-belt compliance but rooted in his work as doctor, where he focuses on preventing complications rather than merely treating them. "I believe in prevention of diseases. I work in diabetes where people are dying of complications, but all of them are preventable," he said.
In plea filed through advocate Wills Mathew, Kesavadev highlights dangers faced by children and seeks effective implementation of child-seat requirements. It refers to road crashes involving young people and argues age- and size-appropriate restraint systems are particularly important for children.
He said problem especially visible in taxis where focus on protecting vehicle through additional seat covers could inadvertently compromise passenger safety. "Actually, car owners are trying to protect car and not protect passenger," he said.
The Bench disposed his PIL with liberty to approach Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, asking Ministry to receive and examine records.