Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Sept 3: Adopting a tough stand and sending a strong message to the violators, the Division Bench of the High Court comprising Justice Virender Singh and Justice Muzaffar Hussain Attar today once again declined to release the vehicles, which were impounded by the Traffic Police for non-adherence to the directives of the Supreme Court vis-à-vis use of tinted films and other material on the glasses of the private as well as Government vehicles.
When the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Dr Davinder Singh Jasrotia was taken up for hearing, Senior Additional Advocate General, Gagan Basotra along with Deputy Advocate General Inderjeet Gupta submitted before the Division Bench that Inspector General of Traffic Police, Munir Ahmad Khan has filed the response on the applications moved by the owners of the impounded vehicles.
Similarly, Advocate Rohit Kapoor, the counsel for the PIL, submitted that he has not only filed objections but also moved an application seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against the owners of the vehicles.
“The compliance/ observance of the directions of the Supreme Court including those issued in review petition on August 3, 2012 and the directives of Division Bench of State High Court was the obligation of the owners of the vehicles including Government ones. Failure to comply with them is contempt of Court as such these violators/ owners of the vehicles are required to be punished for contempt”, Advocate Kapoor further submitted, adding “the plea taken by the owners of the vehicles is merely an after-thought and an attempt to mislead the court”.
On this the Division Bench observed, “this is non-compliance of the court orders. We will put the impounded vehicles to auction and let the sale proceeds go to the owners”, adding “these vehicles are no longer the property of owners”.
When the counsel for a transporter, whose tourist bus has been impounded by the Traffic Police, submitted that the glasses on the vehicle were originally manufactured tinted and the same doesn’t come under the ambit of the Supreme Court’s directions, the DB said, “even the manufactured tinted glasses should be well within the parameters laid down by the Supreme Court”, adding “moreover, buses come in the shape of chassis from the manufacturers and bodies are fabricated later”.
Rejecting the pleas made by the counsels for the owners of the impounded vehicles, the Division Bench once again declined to release such vehicles whose number is 80. “Let the vehicles remain in the police custody for another two weeks”, the DB said and posted the applications along with the main Public Interest Litigation for September 12, 2012.
The DB also directed the Senior AAG Gagan Basotra to file fresh compliance report before the Court on next date of hearing. Advocate Rohit Kapoor accepted notice of the fresh applications on behalf of the petitioner while as Senior AAG accepted notice on behalf of the State. The DB allowed a week’s time to both the counsels to respond the applications filed by the owners of the seized vehicles seeking their release.
The IGP Traffic, in the latest compliance report, has submitted, “in case of commercial vehicles it is the owners who get their vehicles fabricated as per their own will and choice without taking into consideration the Visual Light Transmission (VLT) of safety glasses at any percentage”.
“The vehicles with tinted glasses having VLT of safety glasses as per Para 26 of the Apex Court Judgment, automatically become almost 100 per cent dark during evening hours as well as night hours and most of the commercial buses are plying during night hours”, he said, adding “moreover, the owners, whose vehicles have been impounded have not shown any certificate from the manufacturer which permits them to ply the vehicles using such type of material as per Para 26 of the Apex Court judgment”.
The IGP further submitted, “a device called Luxometer can measure the level of opaqueness in windows owing to the application of black films but this device is a scarce resource and is very scantly available with the police personnel in India”, adding “the devise is reportedly very costly and hardly available in the market as the same is being manufactured outside India”.
Advocates R P Sharma, B S Charak, Vijay Gupta, Parvinder Singh, S D S Saini, Nonu Khera, M K Sharma, Arun Tandon and N K Attri appeared for the owners whose vehicles have been seized by the Traffic Police for using the tinted glasses.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel