Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT SHARMA
Nutan Tyagi – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. assessment of the facts leading to the judgment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The present petition under Sections 397 and 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘ Cr.P.C .’) seeks the following prayers:-
ii. The petitioner be acquitted from the Charges U/s 279/304A IPC.
BACKGROUND
2.1 On 26.09.2004, upon receiving DD No. 18 PP Inderlok, ASI Mohd. Rajiq along with Constable Ashok Kumar reached at the spot, i.e., Red Light near Zakhira Flyover Chowk and found that one Bus bearing registration No. DL1P7563 and scooter No. DL8SM7545 were lying in an accidental condition and the injured person namely, Raisuddin, was already taken to the Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, Punjabi Bagh. Thereafter, ASI Mohd. Rajiq left Constable Ashok Kumar at the spot and procured the MLC No. 816/2004 (Ex. PW8/A) qua the injured Raisuddin, S/o Sh. Inayat Ali, wherein, the doctor had made his observation regarding the injured as “Brought Dead”. In the Maharaja Agrasen Hospital itself, one person, namely, Tej Bahadur S/o Sh. Mahavir was stated to be the eye witness of the accident. The Investigating Officer/ASI Mohd. Rajiq recorded the statement of the com
The absence of key eyewitness testimony undermines the prosecution's case on charges of rash and negligent driving, necessitating acquittal.
Criminal negligence requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, and mere occurrence of an accident does not presume rashness or negligence.
Negligence and rashness must be proven beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC; mere involvement in an accident does not equate to guilt.
The principle of res ipsa loquitur cannot substitute for proof of negligence in criminal cases, and reliance on inadmissible evidence leads to wrongful conviction.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially when relying on interested witnesses, and must establish the essential elements of rash and negligent driving.
The main legal point established is the application of the principles of rash and negligent driving under the Indian Penal Code, supported by consistent evidence and interpretation of relevant legal ....
Victim of accident cannot be held responsible for delay in registration of FIR.
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
