Delay in lodging FIR should not be treated as fatal for motor accident claim proceedings if the claimant has satisfactory and cogent reasons for it.

JUDGMENT

1. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is being heard and disposed of finally.

2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants-claimants against the judgment dated 16.08.2016 passed by Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bali, District Pali in MAC Case No. 43/2014 whereby, learned Tribunal after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties, rejected the claim petition preferred by the appellants-claimants on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is an admitted position that the accident occurred on 23.07.2008 in which Smt. Tulsi Kanwar, while travelling on a motorcycle was seriously injured. She was taken to a private hospital at Falna from where she was referred to L.N. Memorial Hospital, Jodhpur and ultimately on 26.07.2008, she succumbed to the injuries sustained. For this accident, an FIR was registered on 18.08.2008.

4. He further submits that the claim petition of the appellants has been rejected only on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR. He submits that the claimants belong to lowest rung of society and are not aware of the niceties of law and, therefore, mere delay in lodging the FIR cannot be fatal to their claim petition preferred before the Tribunal. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ravi vs. Badrinarayan andOrs. reported in AIR 2011 SC 1226, in support of his contention.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company submits that since the factum of accident was not conclusively proved, therefore, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim petition vide its judgment dated 16.08.2016 on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR. However, learned counsel is not in a position to controvert the fact of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Ravi vs. Badrinarayan and Ors. reported in AIR 2011 SC 1226.

6. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the judgment dated 16.08.2016 as well as other relevant record of the case.

7. As per the factual details mentioned in the judgment dated 16.08.2016, it is clear that deceased Tulsi Kanwar, while travelling on a motorcycle on 23.07.2008, met with an accident and was taken to Vyas Hospital, Falna and thereafter she was referred to L.N. Memorial Hospital at Jodhpur. The FIR of the said accident was registered on 18.08.2008. The claimants belong to a backward area of State of Rajasthan and are residents of Village Barwa, Tehsil Bali, District Pali, they were not aware of the niceties of law, more particularly, in the situation when one of the close family member had passed away therefore, delay in lodging the FIR is quite natural without understanding the consequences of the same. Thus, on the ground of delay in lodging the FIR, the claim petition is not liable to be dismissed.

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ravi vs. Badrinarayan and Ors. (supra) held as under:-

20. It is well settled that delay in lodging FIR cannot be a ground to doubt the claimant's case. Knowing the Indian conditions as they are, we cannot expect a common man to first rush to the Police Station immediately after an accident. Human nature and family responsibilities occupy the mind of kith and kin to such an extent that they give more importance to get the victim treated rather than to rush to the Police Station. Under such circumstances, they are not expected to act mechanically with promptitude in lodging the FIR with the Police. Delay in lodging the FIR thus, cannot be the ground to deny justice to the victim. In cases of delay, the courts are required to examine the evidence with a closer scrutiny and in doing so; the contents of the FIR should also be scrutinized more carefully. If court finds that there is no indication of fabrication or it has not been concocted or engineered to implicate innocent persons then, even if the