What a rediculous and illogical judgement by the court 1. Law already exists in which one can legally put tints/films in car with 70% visibility in front and rear and 50% visibility on the sides. SC has contradicted an existing law and made a new law even though it has no authority to do so. 2. It has been banned because of few instances of rape inside a car...so using the same logic the court should also order people to open all there windows and doors of there house since majority of rapes happen indoors. 3. The court has allowed tinted glass from manufacturers with the 70/50 existing law. Either its safe or its not...the court cant make up its mind. There is no difference between tinted glass and after market films pasted on the glass since visibility would be the same if same 70/50 guidelines are followed. So the court contradicted not only the law but its own judgement aswell.