18/06/2025
TO. *Draft*
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
The humble petition of the Petitioner
---
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the Petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and resident of Surat, Gujarat, bringing this petition in public interest to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which mandates compulsory wearing of helmets for two-wheeler riders.
2. That Section 129 read with Section 194D imposes a punitive restriction on liberty, prescribing fines and license suspension for non-compliance. The law is uniform across India, with negligible exceptions, even for low-speed, non-highway localities.
3. That the Petitioner submits that such compulsion violates:
Article 19(1)(d): Right to freedom of movement;
Article 21: Right to personal liberty and autonomy;
And fails the test of proportionality as laid down by this Hon’ble Court in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1.
4. That the enforcement of the rule in Gujarat, especially in urban and rural low-speed zones, causes harassment of citizens, economic burden on the poor, and excessive interference with personal choice under the guise of public safety.
5. That the objective of public safety can be achieved through awareness, non-penal incentives, and context-based exemptions (e.g., local short-distance riders), rather than blanket penal mandates.
6. That there exists no clear data establishing that forced helmet use in low-speed or short-distance city travel substantially reduces injuries compared to other holistic traffic reform strategies.
7. That no equally effective but less intrusive alternatives were considered by the legislature, thereby failing constitutional proportionality.
---
PRAYERS
In view of the above, the Petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
1. Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari or declaration declaring Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and Section 194D, as violative of Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, to the extent that they mandate compulsory helmet use for adult riders without exceptions.
2. Alternatively, direct the Union of India to frame balanced rules allowing exemptions or personal-choice clauses in helmet use based on safety contexts and liberty.
3. Direct the State of Gujarat to cease arbitrary enforcement of the rule where personal liberty is disproportionately restricted.
4. Pass any other orders deemed just and proper in the interest of justice.
---
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL EVER PRAY
