Bombay High Court Upholds Turban Exemption for Sikh Riders From Helmet Rule, Dismisses Equality Challenge

The Bombay High Court has refused to interfere with the legal provision that exempts Sikh men wearing turbans from the mandatory helmet rule while riding two-wheelers, ruling that the exemption is based on a valid legal classification and does not violate the constitutional right to equality.

The decision came while the court dismissed a petition filed by a 23-year-old student challenging the proviso under Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner had argued that allowing a specific group to avoid the helmet requirement amounted to unequal treatment under the law and was contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution.

A division bench comprising Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta rejected the argument, observing that Article 14 prohibits arbitrary discrimination but allows reasonable classification if it serves a legitimate public purpose.

The court held that the exemption granted to Sikhs wearing turbans falls within the principle of reasonable classification and therefore cannot be treated as unconstitutional. It further clarified that the concession is not based on religion, caste or creed, but on a legally recognised classification that has been incorporated into the law.

Under Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, helmet use is compulsory for both riders and pillion passengers on two-wheelers. However, the law contains a specific proviso exempting Sikh individuals who are wearing turbans from this requirement.

The High Court also observed that the primary objective of the helmet law is to improve road safety and protect lives. At the same time, it found no merit in the contention that the statutory exemption infringes upon the fundamental rights of other citizens.