'Seat belt is not a formality': SC directs strict enforcement of law on wearing seat belts

The apex court's observations assume significance, as recently many accidents have been happening in the country due to poor prosecution and factors such as not wearing a seat belt.
The top court clarified that it is the bounden duty of the enforcement agencies to ensure strict compliance with the law against violators for not wearing seat belts.
The top court clarified that it is the bounden duty of the enforcement agencies to ensure strict compliance with the law against violators for not wearing seat belts.(File photo | EPS)
Updated on
2 min read

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said wearing a seat belt is not only a legal obligation but also a moral duty towards one’s family. It criticised enforcement agencies for lax implementation and directed them to strictly enforce the rules.

"Seat belt is not a formality. It is a life-saving device. Enforcement agencies cannot close their eyes. It is their statutory duty to ensure every car occupant wears it," said a Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Bagchi and V Mohana.

The apex court's observations assume significance, as recently many accidents are happening in the country, including at the national highways, due to poor prosecution and factors such as not wearing seat belt and driving at a higher speed than the prescribed limit.

The top court clarified that it is the bounden duty of the enforcement agencies to ensure strict compliance with the law against violators for not wearing seat belts.

The SC was hearing a PIL filed by Jothydev Kesavadev, a doctor and researcher represented by advocate Wills Mathews, seeking a direction for strict enforcement of Section 194B Motor Vehicle (MV) Act (Rs 1,000 fine) and Rule 138(3) CMVR (belt mandatory for all).

The top court clarified that it is the bounden duty of the enforcement agencies to ensure strict compliance with the law against violators for not wearing seat belts.
Do we really care about children's safety on roads?

Hearing the PIL of Kesavadev, the apex court expressed concern over the deaths due to non-wearing of seat belts, including rear seat belts. It directed all the states/union territories to file a compliance affidavit on the kind of steps for front and rear seat enforcement, challans of last year, and awareness campaigns.

The petitioner in his plea cited the unfortunate death of former Tata Sons Chairman Cyrus Mistry in 2022 in the rear seat, as he was sitting without a seat belt.

The counsel appearing for Kesavadev argued that several deaths and injuries caused in road accidents could be prevented if the law mandating wearing of seat belts was complied with.

Hearing these contentions from the petitioner, Justice Bagchi pointed out, "When we have law, we have technology of alarm and camera, why still non-compliance? Because enforcement is lax." The court posted the matter for further hearing after six weeks for a compliance report.

During the hearing, amicus said 80% of car occupant deaths in 2024 were non-belted; rear-seat compliance is 5%, though mandatory since 2005.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com