Introduction:

In the case of Kamlesh v. State of Punjab and Others, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, under Justice Kuldeep Tiwari, scrutinized the alarming issue of unregulated bulletproof vehicle modifications. The petitioner, Kamlesh, challenged the seizure of a bulletproof Toyota Fortuner, allegedly used by her son, an A-category gangster involved in approximately 41 criminal cases. The court’s attention was drawn to the absence of any regulatory framework governing the conversion of civilian vehicles into bulletproof ones, raising serious concerns about public safety and law enforcement efficacy.

Arguments:

Petitioner’s Side: Advocates Mr. Amit Agnihotri and Ms. Anju Sharma Kaushik argued that the SUV had been in illegal police possession since September 8, 2024. They contended that the vehicle’s modification was lawful and that its seizure violated the petitioner’s rights.

Respondent’s Side: The State of Punjab, represented by Deputy Advocate General Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, initially defended the seizure. However, upon the court’s directive, an affidavit from Punjab’s Director General of Police, Gaurav Yadav, admitted the absence of any policy regulating bulletproof vehicle modifications. The affidavit revealed that only after the court’s intervention did the state consider forming a committee to draft suitable guidelines.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice Tiwari expressed shock over the state’s inaction, stating that allowing a notorious gangster to use a bulletproof vehicle without oversight reflected a “shocking state of affairs”. The court expanded the scope of the petition, impleading the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to ascertain if any national regulatory framework existed. It directed the Chief Secretaries of Punjab, Haryana, and the Union Territory of Chandigarh to file affidavits detailing any policies or amendments regulating the manufacture, sale, and use of protective gear, especially bulletproof vehicles. The court emphasised the necessity of a comprehensive policy to prevent such protective gear from falling into the hands of criminals, terrorists, and anti-social elements.

Conclusion:

The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s intervention in the Kamlesh case underscores the critical need for stringent regulations governing the modification of civilian vehicles into bulletproof ones. The court’s directives aim to prevent the misuse of such protective gear by criminal elements, ensuring that law enforcement agencies are not undermined by the very tools meant to protect. As the matter progresses, it serves as a wake-up call for state and central authorities to address these regulatory gaps promptly.