Brief Facts 

In the Matter Mohanan V.V v. State of Kerala a petition asking for a medical exemption from the requirement that riders of two-wheelers wear helmets. In the current case, the petitioners were dealing with a severe headache and were receiving ongoing therapy for it. The petitioners were unable to use anything like helmets to cover their heads or place any weight on them. They thus want a waiver from the helmet requirement when riding a two-wheeler inside their administrative boundaries in order to avoid being fined as a result of the A.I. camera video.

Analysis of Court order 

A person cannot be exempted from wearing a helmet while operating a two-wheeler, according to the ruling of the Kerala High Court’s single-judge panel, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan.

The Court examined Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 and Rule 347 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules of 1989, both of which required that the driver and passenger of a two-wheeler wear “protective headgear,” or helmets. It was also underlined that “No citizen shall be excluded from wearing a headgear helmet when operating a two-wheeled vehicle.

The Court ruled that petitioners who had any disease that prevented them from donning helmets had to stop riding two wheels. It also highlighted that using a two-wheeler while wearing a helmet is to safeguard the citizen’s life, which is the responsibility of the State, and that using a two-wheeler while disobeying the regulations is not a basic right given the availability of public and private transportation options. The Court also ruled that an enterprise started by the Motor Vehicle Department that is creative may not be discouraged and praised the installation of AI surveillance cameras as an innovative measure for identifying violations of traffic laws. The Court rejected the petition after making it obvious that the petitioners could not avoid AI cameras by obtaining the exception they requested in the current case.