Exemption granted to Sikhs wearing turbans from wearing helmets under Section 129 of the MV Act is a reasonable classification under Article 14, as it is based on an intelligible differentia and serves the object of the statute.

JUDGMENT :

Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

2. The petitioner in-person challenges Proviso to Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the MV Act) on the ground that it violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

3. As per contention of the petitioner, Section 129 of the MV Act states that, “every person driving or riding (otherwise than in a side car, on a motor cycle of any class or description) shall, while in a public place, wear protective headgear conforming to the standards of Bureau of Indian Standards.”

The said Proviso shall not apply to a person who is a Sikh. It violates fundamental rights as the said Proviso is arbitrary classifying and exempting Sikh Community.

It is contended that the Government is doing class legislation by denying equal protection of laws and making certain people offender, which is not supported by any provisions of the Constitution of India. Equality before the law ensures no special privilege to any person or class. When all people in India are being governed by the Rule of Law and have equal protection of law, such classification is not justified and, therefore, Sections 129 and 194(d) of the MV Act be declared as unconstitutional being inconsistent with Article 14 of the Constitution.

4. In affidavit filed by the Union of India, while resisting contentions of the petitioner, it is stated that since the MV Act provides for exemption in respect of Sikh Community, it is not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It is only a reasonable classification and, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. The petitioner reiterates the said contentions and submitted that the Proviso to Section 129 of the MV Act is violative of fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution. The MV Act is enacted which makes it compulsory to wear protective headgear (helmet) of such qualities as to reduce head injuries to riders of two-wheeler. The Proviso violates Article 14 of the Constitution and, therefore, it be declared violative of fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.

6. Learned DSGI for the respondent vehemently submitted that though Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees “equality before the law”, it permits a reasonable classification meaning thereby the Government can make distinct classes for different groups if there is a valid or logical basis and public purpose.

He has also invited our attention towards the decision of this court at Goa Bench in the case of Girish Uskaikar vs. Chief Secretary and anr, reported in 2001 4 Bom CR 122 wherein this issue was considered and submitted that exemption given to Sikh Community is not on the basis of caste or creed or religion. However, members of the Sikh Community wear turban, which serves object of provision and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

7. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed seeking directions to declare Proviso to Section 129 of the MV Act exempting the Sikh Community from wearing helmet. Section 129 of the MV Act, for reference, is reproduced, as under:

“129. Wearing of protective headgear.-- Every person, above four years of age, driving or riding or being carried on a motorcycle of any class or description shall, while in a public place, wear protective headgear conforming to such standards as may be prescribed by the Central Government:

Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply to a person who is a Sikh, if, while driving or riding on the motorcycle, in a public place, he is wearing a turban:

Provided further that the Central Government may by rules provide for measures for the safety of children below four years of age riding or being carried on a motorcycle.

Explanation.-- "Protective headgear" means a helmet which,--

(a) by virtue of its shape, material and construction, could reasonably be expected to afford to the person driving or riding on a motorcycle a degree