Soft In The Head: Pune Activists and MLAs Object To Helmet Rule

If you heard that 16 Indians die every hour on Indian roads, you’d probably do everything you possibly could to be safer. One group in Pune though, sees things very differently. While common sense and Indian law mandate safety measures like helmets, this group wants the helmet rule to be scrapped for fear of “real killers” like spondylitis and hair fall! Even in the face of some grim statistics. India, with 1, 39, 091 deaths in 2013, has the most road accident fatalities in the world. That statistic can be sugar-coated by pointing out that when considered in proportion to our total population, the figure looks better. Even so, it’s hard to fathom that the entire population of Bermuda – twice over – perishes every year on Indian roads.

Considering that estimates suggest over 60 per cent of Indian motor vehicles are two-wheelers, one would imagine that as a society, we would be doing everything possible to improve road-safety measures for these vehicles – and you’d be right. The Indian Judiciary has repeatedly upheld Sections 128 and 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act that deal with the matter of wearing protective headgear and two-wheeler safety.

However, in Pune, India’s seventh-largest metropolis, a group of people calling themselves the Action Committee Against Helmet Compulsion (ACAHC) see things differently. The group, which boasts of the support of MLAs and NGO heads in Pune, is protesting against the police’s drive against motorists who flout the helmet rule.

In 2011-2012 alone, 20 per cent of road accident fatalities in Pune were the result of two-wheeler accidents, the majority of these cases being from head-injuries. This being the case, it seems strange that legislators and NGOs would take a stance contrary to public safety but things go from just strange to outright bizarre when their issues with helmets are examined.

Among those leading the charge against helmets is NGO head Dr Shailesh Gujar. Dr Gujar claims that most helmets are American or Chinese made and hence are not medically suitable for the size of the Indian head. One would hope that with such brilliant medical insight, his title is the result of a PhD and not a medical degree, but alas this isn’t the case. He further argues that wearing of helmets can cause spondylitis and hair fall, thus becoming, at least in my experience, the first person to effectively prioritise brain damage below baldness.

ACAHC convenor, Balasaheb Runwal, makes the case that motorists rarely cross speeds of 10 to 20 kmph in city limits, thus making helmets redundant, but as anybody who has ever fallen from a stationary position will testify – injuries hardly require great speed.

There are still others whose reasons range from conspiratorial (a ploy for helmet manufacturers to make a killing) to the banal (inconvenience). Suryakant Pathak, the group’s president, best showcased ACAHC’s tenuous understanding of the purpose of helmets when he effectively stated that helmets do not decrease the number of accidents – completely missing the point that the purpose of helmets is to prevent grievous injury during accidents, not to prevent accidents altogether.

The group seems like salmon, swimming against the tide and flow of the stream of common sense, yet the support they enjoy from legislators gives them a legitimacy that is worrying.

ACAHC currently enjoys the support of all the cities BJP MLA’s, the city chiefs of both the Congress and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) and the National Congress Party’s district president.In fact, BJP MLA, Medha Kulkarni, even claims to have received reassurances from Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis regarding the same.

While the law itself makes ACAHC’s protestations redundant, and there has been resistance to ACAHC from some parts of society as well as the police, one hopes that political will does not triumph over better sense and public interest.