SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 1651

ASHOK BHAN, B.N.KIRPAL, V.N.KHARE
M. C. MEHTA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


( 1 ) AN interim report has been received from Mr Bhure Lal. He is granted eight weeks time to furnish a further report. He is also requested to see that surprise checks are carried out as directed in our order dated 22-1 l-2001.

( 2 ) MR Mukul Rohatgi, learned Additional Solicitor General states that the government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has sent a communication dated 23-11-2001 to the Secretaries/commissioners of all the state Governments and Union Territories as well as to the Directors General of Police of the respective State Governments to the effect that it should be ensured that the driver and the person seated in the front seat wear the seat belts while the vehicle is in motion.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the Union of India, therefore, all over India, this requirement has to be complied with, namely, the passenger sitting in the front seat and the driver must compulsorily wear the seat belts. Mr Rakesh dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel draws our attention to a public notice which has been issued by the Government of NCT, Delhi wherein it has been stated that the driver and the person seated in the front seat of the motor vehicle are required to wear seat b












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top