xBhp can always stand for strictness in licensing issuing as well as cap on taxes for SBK's.

How to go about doing this?

calling a judge silly is a a contempt of court ? and why do you feel calling someone silly amounts to abusing ? contempt of court is something different .

Dear Puneet, do you want to discuss the topic or do you want to find ways to take the frustration out on the Jurisdiction without breaking the next bread behind bars?

Come on mate, stop talking OT. Lets get back to the point and discuss how valid the ruling is, and are there any ways how we can ensure that the concern is addressed to.

All Cheers
dcs

P.S: I am not a Lawyer hence can not tell you exactly what all can one afford to say to a Judge, but I better be safe then sorry.

Contempt of court can be kept aside.

The ruling has a noble intent..what is notable is that if people are not enjoying their freedom with responsibility, then the authorities will have to appoint a policing method.

In Pune, a lot of so called "knowledgeable" and "expert" class of people came up with a million problems that could result due to helmet usage. Till the time that we have such people who want to turn away their senses, who needs wars to affect us?

A Warning To Bloggers: Contempt Of Court IPC 498A

Thanks for the post!!

+1. This is the first thing they must do.

I do also think its a noble judgement and would spread at least some awareness.
The law makers i hope are also thinking about strict punishment for offenders who do not wear helmets.
But if its a positive action it should be taken that way.
And yes everyone should respect a courts judge.
You can talk about the ruling that he has given and leave him aside.
No offence but they are all more knowledgeable and experienced individuals.

I feel instead of debating over the costs of helmet or the rule where one has to buy a new helmet with every new 2 wheeler we should appreciate the efforts as its really a good decision taken by the supreme court, if this rule can reduce the death due to accidents by even 5% all over the country than its a good decision as per me.

useless and wrong decision........buying a helmet will not ensure that people will actually wear it.

Helmet should be compulsory while riding and not while buying.

there are already people who have helmet and not using it.

moreover, people will be forced to buy helmets which they don't like.

The license issuing policy is so damn easy nowadays.

You know how I got my license? - Reverse a car and ride a 100cc bike at 10 kmph... That's it!
Ask yourself my biker brothers, can you be proud of getting that license with this flimsy excuse of a driving test?


As the Link by Sir Sunil points out, the court judgements may be discussed in decent language...
So, with full decency I assert that Licensing policy is where the scope for improvement stays.


My point is that Bikers will wear helmets (you give them with the bike or you don't) and Posers/ Ladies won't feel comfortable wearing them (you give them with the bike or you don't).

All depends on habits and attitudes of people, and this rule affects neither habit nor attitude. However, I do support the court's noble intentions.

freedom of expression... have you forgot??? and ours being such a democratic and tolerant country who baby sits terrorists. may i elaborate.....(fun intended) forget the judges sunilg, everybody knows what our judiciary is, and do not worry no judge is going to read our posts. if they had been reading we shall have better days in all perspective.

regarding the judgement passed they are forcing people, which they can't. more over first shall we get better roads with adequate lightning on them?? its one of the major factors contributing to accidents everyday. secondly, better tests for license granting process as which many people pay an agent and get one easily, some even without a test. some better and quality products on bikes like abs(making it optional) disc brakes rear and front like a better standard than the present one.

if they really care about people in the first place make a transparent system first which is efficient and secondly here in Maharashtra it has happened before that you should buy a certain standard marked helmet, later it was found out the company belonged to an politicians relative. getting my point????(better cops will be highly appreciated). END OF MY WISH LIST..PHEW

IMO, i think its a start. Safe or not safe, atleast a certain part of moral obligation has been fulfilled. Which is a lot, looking at the state of our country.

You know its really really funny seeing guys on R15s, ZMAs, ZMRs, P220s, and what not expensive bikes, but wearing a 150 bucks helmet.

Man, your apparel equally says a lot about you, rather than just your bike ( and by apparel i dont mean clothes, but whether you are wearing shoes or not, a good helmet, and are adequately shielded by your clothes ).

I think the next step should be making a rule against bikes without RVMs. That is another bone of contention. I suggest that it should be made compulsory to have em on each bike. You'll have em, and then only will you look into em.

And even if you dont, atleast they might just alert you of something behind you, and might save someone's life.

Instead of passing judgment to make everybody forcibly buy a cheap helmet along with the bike, they can strictly enforce wearing helmet. The point here is, whether you are using a helmet and not whether you are buying a helmet. A soul who does not want to use helmet, keeps the helmet at home or tag to the bike and just ride.

For sure, a judge knows how the licence issuing process in India is, and how striclty the rule of rear view mirrors and helment rule is enforced.

+ 1