https://www.salarnews.in/public/uploads/images/advertisment/1734528783_header_adds.gif

HC calls for tougher laws to curb wheeling and stunts on roads

Karnataka High Court seeks stricter laws to curb wheeling after rejecting bail of repeat offender

PTI

https://www.salarnews.in/public/uploads/images/newsimages/maannewsimage14052025_231019_whee.png
  • HC calls for tougher laws to curb wheeling and stunts on roads

Bengaluru, 14 May 


The Karnataka High Court raised serious concerns over the lack of specific legal provisions to deal with the growing menace of 'wheeling' and called for tougher laws to curb it.

Wheeling is a stunt where two-wheeler riders lift the front wheel while driving.

Justice V Srishananda, while hearing a bail plea, observed that current laws fall short of effectively deterring such behaviour.

Currently, individuals performing wheeling can only be charged under provisions related to negligent or rash driving, which are bailable offences. The fines for wheeling can range between 1,000 to 25,000. 

Justice Srishananda noted that these provisions are inadequate for law enforcement to take stringent action. "(When) enacting the Motor Vehicles Act, perhaps the lawmakers did not envisage a situation where a two-wheeler would be driven on the rear wheel alone." 

The Court highlighted that wheeling not only endangers the lives of riders and pillion passengers but also poses a grave threat to public safety.

"Young motorcyclists wrongly equate wheeling with bravery," the court noted.

The Court rejected a bail application of a man accused of performing wheeling on a motorcycle with two pillion riders in October 2024.

According to the police, the stunt ended in a crash when officers attempted to intercept the vehicle. A confrontation followed, during which the accused allegedly abused the officers, caused injuries, and damaged government property by throwing a police phone into a canal.

While the accused maintained that he was falsely implicated due to a personal dispute with the police, the High Court was not convinced. The judge also took into account the prosecution's claim that the petitioner was a repeat offender and had behaved aggressively during the incident.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *