Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.36 seconds)

State vs . Rajni on 17 December, 2012

" The relevant aspect to be noted is that the road on which the accident took place is a busy road. Site plan Ex. PW6/B does not indicate that the ladies were crossing the road from a place earmarked for the pedestrians to cross the road or that there was any zebra crossing. ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­. For attracting the provisions of Section 304­A, IPC the negligent act of the accused must be culpable and gross and not merely based on an error of judgment, or the one which arises because of lack of intelligence. For holding an accused criminally liable one has to take into consideration all the attending circumstances which must also include any situation created by the negligent act of the injured person. In the present case, there is no evidence on record to show that the Petitioner was driving the offending vehicle at a very high speed or in a rash and negligent manner. There are no skid marks on the road to show that the FIR No. 341/05 Page 7 of 9 State vs. Rajni vehicle was being driven at a high speed. Thus, in view of circumstances of the present case it cannot be held that the accused was grossly negligent or reckless that he must be held criminally liable. The prosecution in the present case has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the Petitioner."
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1