The exemption granted to Sikh men wearing turbans from wearing helmets while riding two-wheelers is not on the basis of religion, but on “reasonable classification”, the Bombay High Court has said, dismissing a petition challenging the provision.
Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta of the Nagpur Bench on Monday dismissed the petition filed by Kirtesh Chaudhari, a 23-year-old student.
The plea challenged a proviso to Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which grants this concession, claiming that it violated the right to equality.
The HC said the plea was misconceived, noting that Article 14 of the Constitution (right to equality) prohibits class legislation, but not reasonable classification.
“Article 14 permits reasonable classification, meaning thereby the government can make distinct classes for different groups if there is a valid and logical basis and a public purpose,” the court observed.
“Exemption given to the Sikhs is not on the basis of caste or creed or religion,” it added.
Under Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, every person riding a two-wheeler must wear a helmet. A proviso to the section states that it shall not apply to a Sikh person wearing a turban.
The petition argued that equality before the law means no person or class should have a special privilege. The Centre opposed the plea, asserting that the exemption was a reasonable classification.
The HC concluded that while the helmet law was framed to protect lives, the exemption cannot be said to violate any fundamental rights.