Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
State of H.P. – Appellant
Versus
Mohan Singh alias Sethi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accident from tipper reversing over playing child. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial summoned accused; witnesses examined; denial recorded. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. trial court acquitted for unproved negligence. (Para 6) |
| 4. prosecution asserts negligence by unsafe reversing. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 5. defence requires proof beyond accident occurrence. (Para 10) |
| 6. acquittal reversed only if perverse or ignores evidence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. accused proven driver by testimony and admission. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 8. witness confirms child crushed under rear tyre. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 9. cross-suggestion admits tyre crushing; binds accused. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 10. post-mortem proves crushing caused death. (Para 22) |
| 11. no proof child abruptly entered path. (Para 23) |
| 12. rule 31 mandates safety check before reversing. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 13. unsafe reversing causing death is 304-a ipc. (Para 26) |
| 14. lmv licence covers tippers under 7500kg. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 15. partly allow appeal; convict 279, 304-a. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15.02.2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.1, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Tria
Driver negligent under Sections 279, 304-A IPC for reversing without safety check per Rule 31, crushing child; LMV license valid for <7500kg vehicle; acquittal reversed as perverse.
Revisional jurisdiction confines to patent defects or perversity, not reappreciating evidence; concurrent findings on driver's identity and negligence in reversing without safety check upheld, sustai....
Trial court acquittal in rash driving death case upheld where site plan, photos showed motorcyclist on wrong side despite left space, hitting truck rear tyre; invalid licence not negligence per se; n....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to prove the identity of the driver led to the acquittal of the accused, but the appeal allowed and the accused was convicted for ....
Acquittal upheld in rash driving appeal where site plan/photographs show victim's vehicle in road middle violating keep-left rule as proximate cause; vague 'high speed' and negligence opinions insuff....
Acquittal under IPC Sections 279/337 upheld as site plan showed accused vehicle on correct side, witnesses' vague 'high speed'/negligence opinions inadmissible, no specific negligence proved; appella....
Mere 'high speed' testimony without specifics or skid marks insufficient for rash driving conviction; at intersections, side-road entrants must yield to main highway traffic; reasonable acquittals no....
Interference with acquittal only if perverse or ignoring material evidence; driver not negligent if pedestrian suddenly crosses road with no specific proof of excessive speed beyond vague 'high speed....
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
