That's the kind of ruling that can, and should, be appealed to a higher court, because it does not properly address the situation. The ruling reads like it was intended to allow insurance companies to avoid paying out to victims who wear junk helmets from shady roadside vendors i.e. with no certification at all, which is probably a good idea. Until recently, the number of riders in India who could even afford high-end imported helmets was minimal, but now that imported helmets are becoming more commonplace, they need to be accounted for. The standards for nearly every foreign helmet safety certification are far higher than the ISI requirement, and this needs to be taken into account.
In reality, the Indian government needs to accept that these foreign helmets are coming in, and either grant the ISI sticker on arrival (since the foreign certs surpass the ISI requirement), or they need to accept the foreign certification as being sufficient in and of itself. If there are any lawyers here on the forum, this would make for a good project: both the appeal of the ruling on the grounds that it is too broad, and lobbying politicians to address the acceptance of foreign safety certifications.













Comment