Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
D.M.VYAS, CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Bhikhubhai Kanabhai Miyatra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J.
1. The respondent is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.27 of 2012 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal of Rajkot District. He was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 279 , 304, 304(A) and 337 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and under Sections 177 , 184 and 134 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT . Eventually, he was acquitted of the said offences as per the judgment rendered by the trial court on 30/11/2012.
2. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment of acquittal, the State has preferred the present appeal challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment of acquittal.
3. Concise statement of facts relating to the prosecution case is as follows:
3.1. The accused is a driver by profession. He was working as a driver of an auto-rickshaw bearing registration no.GJ-23- T-3504. The persons who were travelled in the said auto- rickshaw are all labourers and they have been travelling in the said auto-rickshaw for the last one year prior to the date of the accident to attend their labour work from their respective villages. While so, on 07/01/2011, after completion of the labour work, about seven persons were travelling
Negligence requires clear evidence; mere high-speed driving does not equate to rash driving, especially when opposing vehicle lacks proper signaling.
In acquittal appeals, no interference unless perverse; 'high speed' without quantification or collision corroboration fails to prove rash/negligent driving; trial court's reasonable view upheld.
The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused and the need for substantial and compelling reasons to overturn a trial court's acquittal.
The main legal point established is the duty of care expected from drivers, the distinction between rashness and negligence, and the burden of proof on the prosecution to establish the allegations be....
Point of Law : It is well settled that specific evidence is required to be adduced on record by prosecution to prove rash and negligent driving, if any, on the part of the accused.
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
