Back
R.P.SETHI, K.T.THOMAS
Mohammed Aynuddin Miyam – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent
What is the correct application of res ipsa loquitor in motor vehicle negligence cases? What amounts to culpable negligence of a bus driver when a passenger falls while boarding? What is the proper interpretation of criminal negligence under Indian Penal Code Section 304A in the context of a moving vehicle?
Key Points: - (!) The principle of res ipsa loquitor is a rule of evidence only and applies to determine onus of proof in negligence actions, not as a presumption of driver negligence in all motor accidents. - (!) There must be sufficient evidence of the driver's conduct (e.g., moving the bus without signal or before passengers are clear) to fasten criminal negligence; the evidence here was too scanty to hold the driver criminally negligent. - (!) - (!) The passenger fell while boarding; the conviction for culpable negligence under IPC 304A cannot be sustained without evidence showing the driver acted with negligence; the appeals result in acquittal. - (!) - (!) Clarification of what constitutes culpable or criminal negligence, including the distinction between rash acts, recklessness, and failure to exercise proper care; driver must exercise reasonable care and precaution. - (!) - (!) Outcome: appeals allowed; conviction and sentence set aside; acquittal of the driver.
JUDGMENT
Thomas, J.- Leave granted.
2. A passenger, while boarding a bus, fell down therefrom as the vehicle moved forward. The driver of the bus was held guilty of culpable negligence in that episode. He now stands convicted under Section 304A of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to imprisonment for three months. All the three courts, the trial court, the Sessions Court and the High Court in revision -took the same stand. Hence these appeals.
3. The finding of facts cannot be disturbed now. The only question which survives for decision is whether on such facts a conclusion that the appellant is guilty of negligent driving must necessarily follow. The facts which the courts found to have been established in the case are these:
On 17.12.1993 the appellant was driving a bus of the Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation. A passenger by name Agamma boarded the bus enroute at some point. When the bus moved forward she fell out of the vehicle and its rear wheel ran over her. She died of the injuries sustained in that accident.
The conductor of the bus was examined as PW 3. He did not say how the accident happened. However, he admitted that while the bus was in motion he heard a sound of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
