The Gujarat High Court has questioned the government over the failure to enforce Ahmedabad’s mandatory helmet rule and sought explanations on the movement of dumpers during the day and the use of mobile phones by motorists. The court’s observations came during a suo motu hearing on the city’s traffic management and long-term planning.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manas Ranjan Pathak and Justice Nikhil Kariel raised concerns about the three issues during proceedings linked to a wider matter involving traffic arrangements after litigation concerning the Panjrapole Bridge. The bench directed the government to clarify its position at the next hearing, which has been scheduled after two weeks.
The court questioned why the mandatory helmet requirement was not being enforced in Ahmedabad despite the administration undertaking hotspot identification and risk analysis. It observed that helmet use was required for both two-wheeler riders and pillion passengers in other states, and asked why Gujarat appeared to be an exception. The remarks were made orally during the hearing and were not presented in the report as a final judicial direction changing the existing rule.
The bench also questioned how dumpers carrying materials such as sand and cement were operating on city roads during daylight hours despite restrictions. It noted that such vehicles were allegedly moving at speed and that accidents involving them were reported frequently. The court expressed concern that the number plates of these dumpers were often not visible, making identification and enforcement more difficult.
The third issue involved the use of mobile phones while driving. The court said that motorists were seen using phones while operating cars and two-wheelers, and referred not only to calls but also to drivers watching videos on phones placed on dashboards. It questioned how drivers could remain focused on the road in such circumstances and noted that crashes could cause serious harm to two-wheeler riders and pedestrians even when the driver was not physically injured.
The proceedings followed the filing of an affidavit by the state government. Government counsel G.H. Virk placed details of various measures before the court, after which the bench identified what it described as basic concerns requiring clarification. The court also referred to questions it said judges from other states had raised about the absence of effective helmet enforcement in Gujarat.
The hearing places Ahmedabad’s traffic safety system under scrutiny beyond individual violations. Helmet compliance, commercial vehicle regulation and distracted driving depend on sustained enforcement, visible identification of offending vehicles and action that reaches roads across the city. The government is expected to respond to the court’s concerns at the next hearing in approximately two weeks.
