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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 3249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K.Narendran, Muralee Krishna S., JJ.
SUO MOTU
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By The Secretary (Road, Transport And Highways), Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways, Transport Bhawan, Gokul Nagar, Sansad Marg Area, New Delhi - Respondent
WP(C) NO. 25158 OF 2024(S)
Decided On : 21-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Respondent:Sri. R.V.Sreejith, Senior Panel Counsel, Sri. S Rajmohan, Senior, Goverment Pleader & Sri. P. Santhosh Kumar, Special Government Pleader, Sri. K.Rakesh, Advocate, M/S. Deepu Thankan, Ummul Fida, Lakshmi Sreedhar, Lekshmi P. Nair, Vineetha Bose, Cindia S. & Gayathri G., Advocates, M/S. Kevin James, Shabnam Saidalavi, Athul, M.V., Deago John K & Aswin V. Nair, Advocates

Unauthorized modifications to vehicles violate safety standards under the Motor Vehicles Act, posing risks to public safety, necessitating strict enforcement of compliance measures.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Provisions related to safety standards - Writ petition suo motu registered concerning violations of vehicle safety standards prescribed under AIS-008 and AIS-052, posing threats to road users - Court emphasized adherence to specific vehicle lighting, signaling requirements and their prohibition in public vehicles - Previous rulings highlighted the necessity for compliance to enforce public safety regarding road transport vehicles. (Paras 3, 40, 67)

(B) Road Safety - Use of unauthorized lighting and accessories in vehicles - Court pointed out that vehicles improperly modified with dazzling lights and loud sound systems create significant safety hazards for drivers and pedestrians, reinforcing legal obligations for vehicle compliance. (Paras 9, 12, 67)

Facts of the case:
This writ petition initiated based on previous court orders targeting the public use of vehicles that blatantly disregard established safety standards, including various unauthorized modifications to vehicle lighting and design.

Findings of Court:
The court found that ongoing violations necessitate strict enforcement of compliance measures with applicable safety regulations and standards.

Issues: Main issues included the legality of vehicle modifications that endanger safety and the responsibility of state and motor vehicle authorities to enforce safety compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reinforced that unauthorized modifications to vehicles contradict prescribed safety measures under the Motor Vehicles Act, emphasizing that such compliance is non-negotiable for public safety.

Result: Directions issued for rigorous enforcement against safety standard violations and potential vehicle forfeiture.

Table of Content
1. suo motu writ petition regarding vehicle safety standards. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. concerns about dazzling led headlights and unauthorized lights. (Para 8 , 9)
3. court's notice on unauthorized vehicle modifications. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
4. exemption provisions cannot override safety standards. (Para 14 , 15 , 39)
5. directive for enforcement of vehicle safety regulations. (Para 46 , 67)

ORDER :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

This writ petition is registered suo motu based on the order of this Court dated 09.07.2024 in SSCR No.30 of 2023, regarding the use of contract carriages and stage carriages in public places openly flouting the safety standards prescribed in AIS-008 - Installation Requirements of Lighting and Light-Signalling Devices for Motor Vehicle having more than Three Wheels including Quadricycles, Trailer and Semi-Trailer excluding Agricultural Tractors - and even AIS-052 - Code of Practice for Bus Body Design and Approval - posing a threat to the safety of other road users; the use of motor vehicles fitted with exhaust systems emitting fumes and loud sound, wide tyres protruding out of wheel arches/mudguards, etc., posing a potential threat to the safety of its passengers and other road users; recording of videos inside the driver cabin of contract carriages and other vehicles, while the vehicle is moving, thereby disturbing the concentration of the driver while driving; uploading videos by the vloggers on ‘YouTube’ and other online platforms promoting such unauthorised alterations and use of such vehicles in public places, etc.

2. On 09.12.2024, when this writ petition along with the connected matter, i.e., W.P.(C)No.25129 of 2024, came up for consideration before the Division Bench headed by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, in view of the earlier order passed, the matters were directed to be placed on the administrative side for appropriate orders. When the matters were placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice on the administrative side, it was ordered on 13.12.2024, to place the writ petitions before the Division Bench headed by one among us [Anil K. Narendran, J.]. Accordingly, this writ petition along with the connected matter, i.e., W.P.(C)No.25129 of 2024 are being listed before the Division Bench headed by one among us [Anil K. Narendran, J.] and various orders have been passed from 19.12.2024.

3. In the order dated 27.01.2025, this Court noticed that in view of the provisions contained in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules and Regulations made thereunder and also the safety standards in AIS-008 - Installation Requirements of Lighting and Light-Signalling Devices for Motor Vehicle having more than Three Wheels including Quadricycles, Trailer and Semi- Trailer excluding Agricultural Tractors - and AIS-052 - Code of Practice for Bus Body Design and Approval - and the law laid down in Avishek Goenka v. Union of India [ (2012) 5 SCC 321 ] Jijith and others v. State of Kerala and others [2019 (1) KHC 463]; Suo Motu v. Union of India [ 2024 (6) KLT 437 ] etc., the use of KSRTC ‘Munnar Royal View’ double-decker bus in a public place with ‘RGB’ colour-changing decorative LED lights, emitting Red, Green and Blue light in the passenger compartments and on the edges of the safety glass fitted on the side windows; with three headlamps on either side, i.e., six headlamps, after- market stop lights red in colour with neon halo rings amber in colour, openly flouting the safety standards in Para.5.15 of AIS- 008, without ‘retro-reflectors’ on the exterior bus body, to indicate the presence of the vehicle by the reflection of light emanating from a light source not connected to the vehicle, as per the safety standards in Rule 104 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and Para.5.15 of AIS-008, is legally impermissible. The use of such a vehicle in a public place posing a threat to the safety of other road users will be in violation of the law laid down by the Apex Court and this Court in the decisions referred to supr




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 Back to top