[man_and_machine]

Does the law allow then police to rip off the films? They can do that to private property? Do they have the jurisdiction? I mean you can be fined for it and served the notice, but can they manipulate your property?

On a funny note, are they trying to confiscate the films, its like if they catch you driving under the influence of Alcohol, can they force it out of you? I guess they can'nt can they :-) ?

[paras211]

Originally Posted by el lobo 6061

Paras where did this happen to you in Mumbai and how much VLT films were you having on your car? Did they even remove the front film? Were the police choosy about which car to stop or were they stopping all the cars?

Since I have a daily drive from Vashi to Worli, your answers could give some pointers.

This was in Silvassa not Bombay. They were sparing no one. My tints are not legal not jet black, they are in-between. They ripped off parts of the front two windows.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Why this alacrity on this?

If such an effort was put into national use of seat belts, bike helmets by all passengers (and not more than two on a bike), headlight use, lane discipline and speed, India could be changed for the better and safer in ...a month?

So why this one?

[Ripper]

Got fined 100 bucks for the film on my Palio. The most surprising thing is that ive had these on my car for the past 2 years and this includes countless nakabandhis and routine checks, was never pulled up. And today this wise cop thinks the film is too dark. Just another way to make a quick buck IMO.

[condor]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Why this alacrity on this?

So why this one?

@TeG, Seat belts are obvious safety equipment and were not being used.

But here, having the correct sun-film actually helps drive better - and hence is safer. If the order was against film with VLT higher than set by CMRV, then it was perfect. But here, even a VKool film worth 12k is being targetted.

Having got front w/s sunfilm, I know how helpful it is. You can drive all day & yet not feel the strain. Or high-beams from on-coming vehicles. Or high-beams from vehicles coming from behind (reflection through mirrors).

[sachinayak]

Fellow BHPians,

Please help me understand this again. Too much confusion around this. As per what I read here, having a sunfilm is illegal no matter what is the level of transparency. Bangalore Traffic Police's FB page too mentions the same - Bangalore Traffic Police | Facebook


Now I come across this article in the Bangalore Edition of TOI which clearly states, having a sunfilm on your car will attract fine if it violates the Supreme Court's stipulation - 70% visibility for front and rear glasses and 50% for side ones.
Times of India Publications

Why this confusion?

[Sunney]

I sympathize with all Bhpians subjected to atrocity of cops, who show one-upmanship every time some law is made even without proper deliberations. Ironically, when ‘paid’ properly, same cops help dreaded criminals with safe haven and passage!

This law is a classic example of ‘Quixotic’, illogic, hastily made laws by all logic..…
1. Sunfilm is a widely used product, a scientific product helping mankind to save from harmful UV rays and also save electricity drastically to cool interiors of vehicles and ALSO BUILDINGS, in a massive way.
2. The ONLY reason site against it is that ‘cops cannot see the minute % of criminals passing through, inside vehicles’. Out of 100 crore Indians, how many are criminals, rapists, gangsters and extremists? 1%, 0.1%, 0.01%, 0.001%, 0.0001% ????
3. Even though there are 1% dreaded criminals, how many will be nabbed, even if spotted passing in a speeding car by a Traffic cop at some road? (given ‘Indian bribe and ‘cops-criminals cooperation’ standards, which is often deplored by our Judges !)
4. Will they ban Sunfilm which is used massively on window glasses of buildings, where the same criminals could possibly be hiding?
5. If an amendment is made allowing certain type of films are admissible, will cops refund costs of illegally destroyed films?

So, it is too feeble, illogical and impractical a reason to ban the proven usefulness of this modern product helping save massive, scarce energy resources for protection from dangerous UV rays and heat, esp. in a tropical land like India.

We, BHPians may not break the law, however quixotic it is, once legally enacted: but MUST PROTEST AGAINST IT, citing it’s paltry % of uselessness, against the huge loss it effect on national exchequer by energy-loss, and also adverse effect on health by UV rays and heat wave.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sachinayak

.. having a sunfilm on your car will attract fine if it violates the Supreme Court's stipulation - 70% visibility for front and rear glasses and 50% for side ones.

Why this confusion?

@Sachin, from the reports so far, the SC order apparently says that OE glass can have a max of 70 VLT (front) and 50 VLT for sides. Such tint MUST come from factory ONLY. Apparently, for vehicles that do not have OE tinted glass, we cannot add sun-film to even these levels.

Note:
The 70 / 50 VLT is as per CMRV rules. (Which are normally tested correctly before being set)

So why can we not have Sunfilm, if we are not exceeding the 70/50 VLT limits said by the SC itself and also stated in CMRV rules ?

Is the confusion resolved ?

Do you see that the ruling & interpretation are almost arbitrary ?

[rishi_kapoor]

I see some of bhpians harping about contempt of court etc. please appreciate that everyone has a right to voice their opinion, i am sure your perspective would had been different if you would had spent over a lac of rupee to install most transparent but heat rejection film on your 4 cars. Mind it, it is after paying loads of direct and indirect tax (and I don't even want to talk how that is utilised in the country, we all know!)

I installed Vkool premium in all my cars and got certificate that this is "approved as per law", I went extra mile in each case to ensure even the side windows have over 70% visibility. Don't you think I will feel cheated in my own country? I am a salaried guy and money doesn't come easy.

I am not against darker tints that may be used in crimes but is this a correct and well thought way to deal with issue?

If asking questions and voicing against a short-sighted and unthoughtful judgement is contempt and let this be it. At the end of the day somebody has to shout that "the king is naked in imaginary clothes".

As world changes we all are global citizens, we choose to be part of future of our country but bunch of so called learned people at top may not even understand the meaning of this.

What is a forum, if you can't share your views. I would had loved to go legal way but with the rotten legal system of the country, I don't have time, patience and resources to get a recourse.

Nothing personal against anyone, I just wanted to put my 2 cents down and have no intent to insult anyone around. I too am feeling frustrated and sharing my angst with fellow bhpians. Thanks.

[mayankk]

Somebody should tell the milking cops that they should break tinted glasses.
People will pay much much bigger bribes as against a minor sunfilm !
See how quickly the law changes to encompass factory tints too!
Payout will be 2k, compared to100 right now.

Cynical?
You're goddam right.

Especially so since:
1) my car seems to be the only one I see following this supposed law.
2) passed by a checkpost, and smiled at the cops disappointed face. When I looked in the mirror(which shows me crisp, superbright views through my rear screen now, by the by), I see an accent with glasses painted over for all intents, and he passes me by after a couple of minutes. All intact.
Gripe is not with the accent,by the way.

[condor]

But isnt SC only supposed to pass a judgement ? A judgement is not a law/rule untill it is passed as one by a law making body. And the law making body has said 70/50 VLT is the acceptable limit.

[asdon]

TOI's Bangalore edition report is misleading, time and again they used black film, tints with % VLT allowed etc, why can't they just simple report as the judgement in actual?

For those who are still in doubt, please make sure no sunfilm is on your glass black/blue/green whatever, after 19th May, if no one challenges and gets a stay;

OT: Normally cops will see the sides glasses and front glasses and stop the car, but if someone(like me ) plans to put 70% VLT film only on rare glass, how easy it will be for the cops to catch? I am worried about my night drives now on highways, where highbeams from back cause trouble.

PS: I have removed films from all my glasses on 3rd May.

[ms001]

Originally Posted by asdon

TOI's Bangalore edition report is misleading, time and again they used black film, tints with % VLT allowed etc, why can't they just simple report as the judgement in actual?

For those who are still in doubt, please make sure no sunfilm is on your glass black/blue/green whatever, after 19th May, if no one challenges and gets a stay;

OT: Normally cops will see the sides glasses and front glasses and stop the car, but if someone(like me ) plans to put 70% VLT film only on rare glass, how easy it will be for the cops to catch? I am worried about my night drives now on highways, where highbeams from back cause trouble.

PS: I have removed films from all my glasses on 3rd May.

this is misleading information please read this post by BTP,
Films within permissible limits are allowed

https://www.facebook.com/notes/banga...39495276116186

[nitinbose]

Nobody is trying to disobey/dishonour the supreme court. India is our country and the government and its associated agencies like supreme court represent the nation, which inturn is US! So it would be like fighting our own shadow, which would take us no where.

What most people including myself are concerned is the possibility of the underlying unfair business gains. We would be a lot happier to have the 70-50 rule enforced.

Being Bhpians, we would also be happy to be the first to have this done on our cars!


Having said so, I called up Nandi Toyota Bangalore and the accessories department mentions you can have sunfilms on the 70-50 range! When I asked them on the paragraph that mentions no films allowed on the supreme court verdict, they mentioned that's not so.

This led me confused! Are there any exceptions to the authorized car dealers?

[sumeethaldankar]

Originally Posted by Ripper

Got fined 100 bucks for the film on my Palio. The most surprising thing is that ive had these on my car for the past 2 years and this includes countless nakabandhis and routine checks, was never pulled up. And today this wise cop thinks the film is too dark. Just another way to make a quick buck IMO.

Where did this happen ? Did they rip off the films ?