Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Balwinder Katoch – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision challenges negligent driving accident conviction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. lower courts convicted for rash driving offenses. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. children crossing road alleged as accident cause. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. revisional court limited to patent errors. (Para 9 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. witnesses attest high speed loss control. (Para 18 , 19 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 30 , 32) |
| 6. high speed crowded road equals negligence. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 34) |
| 7. vehicle control failure proves driver negligence. (Para 25 , 27 , 29 , 31 , 33) |
| 8. negligence inferred facts not opinions. (Para 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 9. driver proves valid license existence. (Para 38) |
| 10. injuries death prove ipc mv offenses. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 11. sentences corrected exceeding statutory limits. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 12. no probation rash driving deaths. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 13. revision dismissed convictions upheld. (Para 50 , 51 , 52) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 26.2.2015, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge- III, Kangra at Dharamshala, Circuit Court at Baijnath, vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dat
Revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors or perversity, not reappreciating concurrent findings; high speed in crowded area causing loss of control despite sudden obstacle constitutes driver n....
Revisional court cannot reappreciate evidence to upset concurrent convictions under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 absent perversity; driving on wrong side of narrow curve without precautions constitutes....
The court held that concurrent findings of two lower courts regarding negligence and causation in a motor vehicle accident are binding unless proven erroneous, reinforcing limitations on the scope of....
Driving recklessly and losing control of a vehicle causing injury or death constitutes negligence, warranting conviction under Sections 279, 337, 338, and 304-A IPC.
Rashness or negligence in driving not proved by accident alone, vague high speed claims, or absence of licence; injury inconsistency doubts prosecution; revisional jurisdiction limited to patent erro....
Revisional court acquits of rash driving/death charges where site plan shows victim vehicle on wrong side, speed unquantified, negligence opinions inadmissible; upholds conviction for fleeing without....
Revisional court cannot reappraise evidence unless perverse; wrong-side driving at high speed is negligent causing hurt under IPC 279/337/338; probation denied in road injury cases for deterrence.
Negligent driving resulting in injuries constitutes a violation of IPC Sections 279, 337, and 338, warranting conviction and deterrent sentencing.
Negligence in driving leading to injury constitutes a violation under Sections 279 and 337 IPC, affirming strict liability for road traffic offenses.
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
