The Gujarat High Court has questioned the Gujarat government over why Ahmedabad’s mandatory helmet rule is not being enforced, while also seeking an explanation for daytime dumper movement and the use of mobile phones by drivers. The court’s concerns were raised during a suo motu hearing on traffic management and long-term planning in the city.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manas Ranjan Pathak and Justice Nikhil Kariel asked the authorities to respond to the three road-safety issues at the next hearing. The observations came after the state government placed an affidavit before the court through Chief Government Pleader G.H. Virk, outlining various measures being undertaken.
The bench specifically asked why mandatory helmet rules were not being implemented in Ahmedabad despite the authorities carrying out hotspot identification and risk analysis. It observed that helmet use is mandatory for both two-wheeler riders and pillion riders in other states, and questioned whether Gujarat was now the only state where the rule was not being enforced.
The court also referred to the movement of dumpers carrying materials such as sand and cement during the daytime, despite restrictions. It questioned how such vehicles were operating on city roads and expressed concern over accidents involving dumpers. The bench further noted that the number plates of such vehicles were often not visible, making identification and enforcement difficult.
Mobile-phone use by car and two-wheeler drivers was the third issue raised during the hearing. The court said that many drivers appeared to use phones while driving and referred to instances where people allegedly placed phones on dashboards to watch films rather than using them only for calls. It questioned how drivers could remain focused on the road while using a phone in this manner.
The court observed that when such vehicles are involved in crashes, the driver may not always be the person who suffers the most serious consequences. Two-wheeler riders and pedestrians can be exposed to greater risk in collisions involving distracted drivers, the bench said.
The hearing followed a writ petition concerning the Panjrapole Bridge and the wider suo motu proceedings on Ahmedabad’s traffic arrangements. The court said that appeals to civic sense alone would not resolve the problem and referred to questions allegedly raised by judges from other states about the absence of visible helmet compliance in Gujarat.
The observations do not themselves introduce a new helmet rule or announce a new enforcement order. They require the government and relevant authorities to explain the existing enforcement position and the action being taken on the three concerns. The matter has been listed for further hearing after two weeks, when the state is expected to place its response before the bench.
