Bombay HC Issues Notice to Bajaj Auto, Maha Govt on Safety Gears for Pillion Rider

The Bombay High Court has sought the stands of Maharashtra government and two-wheeler major Bajaj Auto on a plea for strict implementation of a Supreme Court order to all two-wheeler manufacturers to equip their vehicles with safety gears for pillion riders.

A bench of justices S M Kemkar and M S Karnik sought the stands of the government and Bajaj Auto last week on a plea by an elderly Mumbaikar, Gyan Prakash seeking court's directions to two-wheeler manufacturers to install proper safety accessories like saree guards and hand grips for pillion riders.

Gyan Prakash, 71, had the moved the high court earlier this month for enforcement of the apex court's February judgement, saying that the government must be asked not to register any two-wheeler which does not conform to the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 guidelines on safety gears for the pillion riders.

Also Read: Tata Nexon AMT Bookings Open at Rs 11,000, India Launch Soon

The relevant rule 123 provides for mandatory safety measures for pillion riders in two-wheelers before their rollout from factories.

The rule says "No motorcycle, which has provision for pillion rider, shall be built without provision for a permanent hand grip on the side or behind the driver's seat, a footrest and a protective device covering not less than half of the rear wheel so as to prevent the clothes of the person sitting on the pillion from being entangled in the wheel."

The application also sought a direction to Bajaj Auto Ltd, a leading two-wheeler maker based in Pune, and other companies not to sell scooters and motorcycles without these safety accessories for pillion riders.

"The transport commissioner should be directed to submit a compliance report on the Supreme Court order," the petition by Gyan Prakash said.

Seeking replies of the government and the auto major to the petition within two weeks, the high court bench has slated the petition for hearing two weeks after submission of the replies.

Gyan Prakash earlier had filed a PIL on the issue in the high court in 2008, but as the apex court was already seized of the matter, the court had disposed of his petition.

Gyan Prakash, in his application, had sought that his PIL be revived and heard.

Also Watch: