Originally Posted by Superbad
industry reaction from the given link
they are waiting for all cars to be stripped of their films so that they can make a killing after that
This has reference to the follwoing news in Hindu Daily that Police will be initiating action to remove all sun control films, though supreme court order is to ban only those films which block over 70% visibility .
As rightly pointed out,by Mr. Padmakumar, IG , it is an infringement of the common man's privacy rights .
Please do justice to the common man . If a proper equipment is not available to execute the supreme court order , it is the duty of the law enforcement department to find and procure one for the same.
Please do not choose a short cut by executing a barbarian methods in your enthisiasm to implement Supreme court Order.
Thanking you in anticipation,
----- Original Message -----
To: Chackos Zacharia
Cc: Goalstar ltd. ; BENNY JOSEPH
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12:45 PM
Subject: SUN CONTROL FILM BAN
Please spread the below information and make public aware of the situation .
SUPREME COURT TO SOON BAN CELL PHONES , because the TERRORIST and CRIMINALS use CELL PHONES WIDELY to plan and EXECUTE CRIMES against common man
1. Please somebody file a public interest litigation to ban CELL PHONES .
Please somebody file a public interest litigation to ban INTERNET in India because all terrorist use internet and emails to communicate , plan and excute crimes and terrorism accorss the Golbe. In India lots of financial crimes are vased on internet only.
2. Supreme Court order is to remove sun control films which block over 70% visibility . If the police do not have the required equipments can the police make there own law ?
Can somebody file a petition to stop such an action by the kerala Police ? We , the law abiding common man in Kerala must now move the court against atrocities of the police department and the Trasport department by misuing / mis interpretting a supreme court order to their convenience
3. Drunken driving is causing lots of road accidents and death in Kerala roads. If we didn't had a breath analiser , will the authorities decide to BAN all bars / liquor shops in Kerala . Thanks , we have an alchohol metre
It is time for us to Act . Please ask every one who is known to you to send their comments to DGP , Kerala in the above email id .
Please see below from HINDU Daily
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The police and traffic officials are quite sceptical about the implementation of the new order from the Supreme Court banning the use of tinted glass on windows in vehicles. Even as the use of tinted windows was prohibited under the Motor Vehicle Rule, the agencies could not enforce the ban till now.
One of the main roadblocks to enforce the new order is that neither the police nor the Motor Vehicles Department has any device to measure whether tinted glass are above the prescribed percentage of visibilty.
“It’s an impractical law as we cannot measure whether the glass is 70 per cent transparent or not. Even though the law came into existence several years ago, no vehicle had been caught for using tinted glass. What we can do is to take action against all the vehicles. In such a case, the people will move court and it will delay the whole action,” a police officer said.
“The Supreme Court had directed the state governments to frame a law in this regard. Once we get directive from the state government and Home Department, we would take action. It is true that the ban already exists but we have not yet enforced,” K Padmakumar, Inspector General, Ernakulam Range, has said.
The Motor Vehicles Department said the action it has taken against such vehicles was not effective. “We had booked several erring vehicles but first we direct the owner to remove the film. If caught again, then we fine them `100. There is no provision for taking strict action against the violators, as in the case of drunken driving and not using helmet,” T J Thomas, Regional Transport Officer, said.
In a similar case that came up before the Kerala High Court against the ban in 1991, a petitioner had contended that the provisions contained in Rule 100 of Motor Vehicle Act violated the ‘right to privacy’ guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The travel in a motor vehicle necessarily postulates the enjoyment of right to privacy. In the course of such enjoyment, the petitioners have the right to use tinted glasses and sun control films on the windscreens and windows of the vehicles, and the prohibition imposed by the police officials amounted to interference in the enjoyment of such rights by the petitioners.
However, the High court had not interfered in the question raised by the petitioner. The use of tinted glasses assumed more relevance with progressively increased use of air-conditioners in automobiles.
Minimisation of the direct entry of sunlight is one of the pre-requisites of effective air conditioning. These arguments are hardly sufficient to plead for the right to privacy. �
However, in view of the deficiency of facts, the court refrained from deciding whether the use of motor vehicles with tinted glasses involved the right to privacy in these cases.