Why no uniformity in no-mask fines: Bombay HC to Maharashtra govt – Hindustan Times

The Bombay high court sought to know from the Maharashtra government as to why the amount of fine for not wearing face masks as per Covid-19 protocols was not uniform across the state. A public interest litigation (PIL) informed the court that the fine amount ranged from ₹100-1,000 in different parts of the state and was causing a financial strain on citizens already affected by the lockdown. The PIL also sought directions to formulate a policy to print special masks with a specific sign or symbol for hearing and speech-impaired persons and for proper utilisation of funds collected from offenders.

On Wednesday, a division bench of justices SP Deshmukh and Girish Kulkarni, while hearing the PIL filed by Lokshahiwadi Balasaheb Sarode Smriti Prabodhan Upakram through advocate Asim Sarode, was informed that while the state government had made it compulsory to wear masks to control he spread of Covid-19, the amount of fines for not wearing one differed and there was no uniformity in the amount collected as fine.

Also Read | Maharashtra, Mumbai see a record 31,855 and 5,190 new Covid-19 cases

“High amounts collected as fine have become a burden on common people who are already in duress due to lockdown,” stated the PIL, submitting that the fine ranged from ₹100-1,000 and hence sought directions to the government to have a uniform, affordable fine and provide free masks to persons from whom such fines were recovered.

The PIL also questioned as to whether members of the same family travelling in a vehicle were supposed to use masks as there were many instances fines were forcefully collected from people travelling in their own vehicles.

The PIL sought details of the total amount of fine collected by authorities across the state and details on how and where the amount was being utilised.

Counsel for the government Priyabhushan Kakade sought time to respond to the concerns raised in the PIL and submitted that the replies would be given in a week, which was accepted by the bench and the hearing was adjourned to next week.