Bangalore: According to press reports, the Supreme Court on Friday August 3, 2012 directed police chiefs of the states and Union Territories to enforce the ban on tinted films beyond permissible limits and black glasses in vehicles, or face contempt action.A bench of justices B S Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar said black films and tinted glasses beyond the permissible limits can not be used, in accordance to the Motor Vehicles Act.In its April 27 verdict, following a petition filed by Kolkata-based Avishek Goenka, the apex court had ruled that manufacturers can use tinted glasses with Visual Light Transmission of 70 per cent on the front and rear glasses and 40 per cent on the side glasses, but banned the use of black films or any other material.
Dismissing interlocutory applications filed by black films manufacturers association and others, seeking modification of the verdict, the bench said: “We are not emphasising on security threat to nation but it is a clear violation of law. No material can be pasted on safety glasses, this law needs to be enforced.” The court warned that the order should be implemented in letter and spirit.“DGPs/commissioners of police are to ensure complete compliance in true letter and substance. At this stage we will not initiate any action on DGPs and other officials, but issue a clear warning that in case of non-compliance the court shall be compelled to initiate appropriate action under the Contempt of Courts Act without any notice,” the bench said.
The contention of some black film manufacturers like M/s Garware Polyester Ltd, M/s Car Owners & Consumers Association, M/s Fairtrade, M/s Car Comforts & Furnishing, M/s Sun Enterprise and M/s Vraj Car, that skin cancer is caused by over exposure to ultra-violet rays, was “misconceived and misdirected,” the bench said. “It cannot be disputed and is a matter of common knowledge that there are a large number of preventive measures that can be taken by a person who needs to protect himself from the ultra-violet rays. Use of creams, sun-shade and other amenities would be beneficial for the individuals intolerable to sun rays. It does not require change of a permanent character in the motor vehicle, that too, in utter violation of the provisions of the statute,” the bench said.