The Nagpur bench of the High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the legal provision that exempts turban-wearing Sikhs from the mandatory helmet rule for two-wheeler riders.
On Monday, Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta rejected the plea filed by Kirtesh Chaudhari, a 23-year-old student, ruling that the legal exemption does not violate the constitutional right to equality.
Challenge To Motor Vehicles Act
The petition targeted a specific proviso within Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act. While the main section mandates that every person riding a two-wheeler must wear a helmet, the proviso explicitly exempts any Sikh individual who is wearing a turban.
Chaudhari argued that this exemption violated Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. In his plea, the student contended that equal protection under the law means no specific class or individual should receive special privileges.
The Union government opposed the student’s petition, arguing that the exemption represents a permissible and reasonable classification under the law.
Court Defends Reasonable Classification
In its ruling, the High Court described the petition as misconceived. The bench emphasized that Article 14 of the Constitution prohibits class legislation but does not prevent reasonable classification.
According to the court, the government is permitted to establish distinct classes for different groups of people, provided there is a valid, logical basis and a clear public purpose for doing so. The judges further clarified that the exemption granted to Sikhs is not based on caste, creed, or religion.
While the bench noted that the overarching law making helmets compulsory was established to protect human lives, it concluded that the specific exemption for turban-wearing riders cannot be said to infringe upon any fundamental rights.
