[antz.bin]

The day the Judges' and Politicians' official vehicles start getting fined for dark sunfilms and they have to pay their fines on the spot in cash from their salary would be the day this draconian law will be repealed.

When it has been proven that this law has had no statistically significant effect on the number of registered rapes, why doesn't some gentleman file a PIL for it to be scrapped?

I am tweeting to Nitin Gadkari ji right now. Lets see if we get a response.

[Chhanda Das]

From what I can understand from the gazette notification (1st link below), sunfilms are still illegal if they have not been added to the car during its manufacturing/assembly in the factory itself.

The honorable Supreme Court of India had mentioned clearly in the judgement of the Avishek Goenka Vs. Union of India & Anr. case writ petition (CIVIL ) NO : 265 OF 2011 specifically under the point number 18 (2nd link below) and I quote "The manufacturer may manufacture vehicle with a higher VLT to the prescribed limit or even a vehicle with tinted glasses, if such glasses do not fall short of the minimum prescribed VLT in terms of Rule 100. None can be permitted to create his own device to bring down the percentage of the VLT thereafter". The honorable Court also mentions under point 23 (2nd link below) of the same case as above and I quote "we have no hesitation in holding that use of black films or any other material upon safety glass, windscreen and side windows is impermissible". The keywords here are "... any other material ...".

Hence, it is clear that sunfilms are still illegal on cars in India.

One interesting aspect of the gazette notification for the 7th Amendment to the CMVR, 1989 is that this was officially notified by the same Mr. Priyank Bharti who had caused quite a bit of controversy with an earlier notification requesting/ordering the ban on bullbars on cars. But that request/order was stayed and later struck down by the honorable Delhi High Court. That sequence of events has been compiled by me from another Youtube channel in chronological order (video link below). I have already verified the contents of the video on the website of the honorable Court and you can do it too with the information shared near the end of the video if you are interested.

Reference links :-

1) The 7th Amendment to CMVR 1989 : https://morth.nic.in/sites/default/f...0wheel,%20.pdf

2) The judgement of the Avishek Goenka Vs. Union of India & Anr. case writ petition (CIVIL ) NO : 265 OF 2011 : http://jowaipolice.gov.in/Laws_and_R...ss_in_cars.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a6q...wnersofIndiaIN

[CarNerd]

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Sunfilm now legal?

Me:

Originally Posted by Chhanda Das

Hence, it is clear that sunfilms are still illegal on cars in India.

Me:

[nairanupg]

Team, The Supreme Court judgement produced verbatim is
"No vehicle can be altered so as to change original specification made by the manufacturer. Such particulars cannot be altered, which have been specified by the manufacturer for the purpose of entry in the certificate of registration." According to the provision of the Act, 'alteration' means a change in the structure of a vehicle. The apex court had actually set aside a judgment of a division bench of the Kerala High Court, which earlier said that the structural alteration was permissible as per the provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.

Section 52 of the Motor Vehicle act 1988 is very clear on modifications, specifying however that there are some changes you can do in your vehicles, as the court said that the primary focus of section 52(1) is not to alter the original specifications by the manufacturer.
Now that the legal Mumbo Jumbo is out of the way, I am not sure if the original specifications by any manufacture specify the glass being used or the presence or absence of a shade. So would it technically count as an alteration ?
The biggest challenge quite obviously is the ambiguity of it all. So, my friends this is all fine at an intellectual level while we debate amongst ourselfs, but in real life, try explaining all this to the poor cop on the street looking to collect a fine 'cause he has to achieve his given target. . Nope, does not work, and that is precisely why my New Safari stays the way, as did the XUV 500 and the Fiesta before that, eventhough it easily crosses 40 degrees

[rapid_fire]

As far as I understand, the sun films are still illegal, unless someone questions it in the court and get a clear verdict based on the new amendment. The BIS standards states regarding the manufacturing process and doesn’t say anything about aftermarket sun films.

I really hope one day our judiciary will recognise the humanitarian side of this problem and allow use of sun control films in the cars. In india, particularly during summer UV index is very high. Without UV protection, there is definite increases risk of skin cancers and premature ageing of skin on prolonged exposure (there has been reports of increased incidence of melanoma in the left forearm of truck drivers in US. Thankfully, our darker skin provides some protection to melanoma, however still there is increased risk on prolonged exposure).

Majority of the mass market manufacturers doesn’t provide any UV protection glasses, however the rich are fairly protected because most of the luxury cars provide UV cut glasses. Wearing body sunscreens on a daily basis may not be feasible for low income drivers. I believe getting protection from an occupational health hazard should be a fundamental human right. Either government should mandate the window tinting and UV protection for all manufacturers or let people put their own protective films. Let government set a higher VLT requirement for after market sun films (nowadays high performance films available with VLT upto 86%, offering more than 99% UV protection), but denying them altogether is inhumane and unethical.

[enj0y_ride]

Originally Posted by sreerknair

I think this thread title has to be renamed. Kerala MVD clarified today that the sunfilm is still illegal and whatever amendments were made in the rule is applicable only for glass that comes out of factory fitted to the car.

Thanks. Could you please help with the link for any government order or clarification.

I feel it has come to a point where we no longer can trust media ( they are simply publishing for increased viewership )

[greenhorn]

Originally Posted by enj0y_ride

Thanks. Could you please help with the link for any government order or clarification.

I feel it has come to a point where we no longer can trust media ( they are simply publishing for increased viewership )

I think for this one we need to. The government is not going to dignify random rumours and fake news with an actual government order etc. Kerala MVD will just post a response.

https://www.mathrubhumi.com/auto/new...rala-1.7433874

(Only news i could find, but it's in Malayalam)

[Neil Roy]

I think the lawyers in this forum can shed some light on the supreme court terminology "manufacturer". Is the "manufacturer" the
a) The Car maker who is manufacturer the car in it's entirety or
b) The OEM Glass manufacturer (which is definitely more than one for each car brand) or
c) The Authorised Workshop who installs the wind shield in the event of damage or whatever.

Whose responsibility is it to maintain the VLT as per "manufacturer" in the supreme court citation? The reason I'm asking is because the VLT can be altered in any of these three work stations. If its the car maker or his authorised workshop who is the logical extension of the car maker, I think we can get them to stick sun film and get a court direction on it's legality.
My personal view is that present court judgements are ambiguous and end up creating more confusion than giving solutions.

[giri1.8]

Looks like ban is here to stay, but I would like some kind of study to be conducted by the government, that shows statistics like, reduction in crime rate or other data to make sure the law actually has an impact.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by rapid_fire

Majority of the mass market manufacturers doesn’t provide any UV protection glasses, however the rich are fairly protected because most of the luxury cars provide UV cut glasses. .

I think you need to read a bit about why vehicles use laminated glass for the windshield and tempered glass on the side windows before throwing rocks at the government.

As per the studies abroad , there is no correlation between vehicle cost and UV protection. As long as Ozone layer is intact , we will do just fine at least in India.

[rapid_fire]

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

I think you need to read a bit about why vehicles use laminated glass for the windshield and tempered glass on the side windows before throwing rocks at the government.

As per the studies abroad , there is no correlation between vehicle cost and UV protection. As long as Ozone layer is intact , we will do just fine at least in India.

Please enlighten us. I searched a lot in online websites, they didn’t give any information other than that tempered glass is used in side windows because they are stronger and cheaper. However laminated glass in front windows is requirement as it will prevent complete shattering of glass on hitting stones from road.
These window films are allowed in most of the countries where automotive safety regulations are much more stringent (UK, USA, Australia, NZ etc). So I don’t think the decision to ban sun films is based on any car safety issue. As far as I know it is purely based on increased incidence of crime using cars with heavily tinted windows.
Also it is myth that UV exposure in India is less. In many places, during summer UV index is as high as 11- 12 (which is extreme). Only thing protect us from sun burns and melanoma is the melanin in our skin.

[Yeldo]

Originally Posted by nairanupg

The biggest challenge quite obviously is the ambiguity of it all. So, my friends this is all fine at an intellectual level while we debate amongst ourselfs, but in real life, try explaining all this to the poor cop on the street looking to collect a fine 'cause he has to achieve his given target.

You've put the real issue in plain words, Sir.

While law is intended to ensure safety of vehicles, road users and benefit the general public, fines and penalties have become ends unto themselves, that is for filling the state's coffers, rather than to ensure compliance by enforcement. Collect as much as money possible from whatever sources that are available seems to be the major intent and purpose of the officials.

[BhayanaV]

Sun films continue to be illegal and I don't think this rule is going to change anytime in near future, no one will actually contest it in supreme court.
It is a different point though that automotive sun films are available on all prominent manufacturers website and you can even apply to get a franchise of one.

[buzzy_boy]

All I'm saying is, I'm glad that some busy-body has not filed a PIL to demolish all houses so that they can't hide crimes being committed within their walls!

[icestrok]

I checked with Hyundai service centre about sun films, they said it was a big no no for my i20 n line. Best they could suggest was an anti glare coating on the front for 7k. Seems a bit excessive. If anyone has done that I’d love to know if it made any noticeable difference to the heat inside the car.

What miffs me though is that I see plenty of high end cards and govt plate cars fully blacked out. Rules for thee and not for me I guess .