The Bombay High Court has sought Maharashtra’s response to allegations that buses, cabs, autorickshaws and other passenger vehicles are being registered or cleared for renewal without mandatory Vehicle Location Tracking Devices (VLTDs), potentially weakening an emergency safety system used by public transport passengers.
A Division Bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata issued notice to the State on September 29 on a petition filed by Om Auto Tech, a distributor of VLTDs compliant with the AIS-140 standard. The Bench directed Maharashtra to file its reply within 14 days, after which the matter may be listed for hearing.
The petition links enforcement of the VLTD requirement to women’s safety in public vehicles. According to the plea, passenger vehicles are required to have a tracking device and a panic button. When activated, the panic button is intended to send an alert containing the vehicle’s location to the State monitoring centre and emergency response system, allowing assistance to be dispatched.
Counsel for the petitioner, Atal Dubey, told the court that the system can protect passengers only when the device is operational inside the vehicle and government records correctly link it to that vehicle. If either condition is absent, the petition argued, a panic button may not connect to an effective response system during an emergency.
The plea alleged that Regional Transport Offices began registering vehicles without VLTD installation from June 2025. It further claimed that vehicle renewals and fitness certifications were being processed without verification of whether the devices had been installed, were functioning or met the required AIS-140 standard. The petitioner said at least 10 vehicles were approved or renewed without such verification.
The petition also referred to directives issued by the Transport Commissioner in July and August 2025 after the petitioner raised the issue. It alleged that RTOs continued to disregard the requirement despite those directions. The claims have not been established by the court, and Maharashtra’s response is awaited.
The legal framework cited in the petition is Rule 125H of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, which was amended on October 25, 2018, to mandate installation of VLTDs in specified passenger vehicles. The petitioner has asked the court to direct the authorities to implement the requirement and take action against officers who approved registrations or renewals without verifying the presence and working condition of the devices.
The case places attention on the gap between a technology mandate and its enforcement at the point where vehicles are registered, inspected and certified for public operation. The State’s reply, due within 14 days, is expected to clarify how Maharashtra’s transport authorities verify VLTD installation, operational status and linkage with emergency monitoring systems.
