Assessment of degree of negligence in revoking a driving licence

Headnote:
Driving Licence - Revocation - Negligent Driving - The court set aside the revocation of the driving licence and modified the penalty to disqualifying the petitioner for a period of two years from the date of the original order for holding or obtaining a driving licence to drive two-wheelers.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a driving licence holder, was involved in an accident resulting in the death of a scooterist. The licensing authority revoked the petitioner's driving licence based on the finding of negligent driving.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that while the petitioner's negligent driving contributed to the loss of life, the degree of negligence was not assessed by a competent court. The court set aside the revocation of the driving licence and modified the penalty to disqualifying the petitioner for a period of two years from the date of the original order for holding or obtaining a driving licence to drive two-wheelers.
Issues: Revocation of driving licence based on negligent driving, Degree of negligence assessment, Appellate authority's decision
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the provisions of Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which allow the revocation of a driving licence if the holder's previous conduct as a driver shows that their driving is likely to be attended with danger to the public. The court also took into account the petitioner's profession and age in modifying the penalty.
Final Decision: The court set aside the revocation of the driving licence and modified the penalty to disqualifying the petitioner for a period of two years from the date of the original order for holding or obtaining a driving licence to drive two-wheelers.

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The petitioner, who is holder of a driving licence, seeks to quash Exts.P6 and P7 order passed by respondents 3 and 4 and to direct the respondents to restore the driving licence of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner states that he is holder of a driving licence issued in the year 2013. On 17.11.2022, when the petitioner was going to his workplace, the vehicle driven by the petitioner hit another scooter whereby the driver of that scooter fell on the road. A bus coming from the rear side hit the rider. Due to the injuries, the rider of the vehicle died. Crime No.1503/2023 has been registered in Hill Palace Police Station arraying the petitioner as 2nd accused, for offences punishable under Section 379 and 304A IPC.

3. The 4th respondent-Additional Licensing Authority issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner and issued Ext.P6 order dated 17.02.2023 revoking the driving licence of the petitioner.

4. Though the petitioner filed appeal No.15/2023 before the Deputy Transport Commissioner, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal considering the fact that the petitioner was earlier accused in a similar offence under Section 304A IPC.

5. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P6 order of the Additional Licensing Authority and Ext.P7 appellate order. The petitioner submits that the incident leading to Crime No.1503/2022 happened while the petitioner stopped the vehicle in order to take a U-turn and by the time, the scooter driven by the deceased hit on the vehicle of the petitioner.

6. The petitioner is the sole bread winner of his family. Being a mechanic, the petitioner needs to drive vehicles as part of his job. Revocation of driving licence has serious repercussions on the life and livelihood of the petitioner.

7. The 4th respondent resisted the writ petition filing a statement. The 4th respondent stated that as per the First Information Report, the careless and negligent act of the petitioner in riding the motorcycle resulted in an accident which ultimately caused death of a lady aged 29 years. The inspection carried out on the vehicles reported that the mechanical condition and breaking system of the vehicles involved in the accident were perfect.

8. The driving licence granted to the petitioner was revoked in compliance with the principles of natural justice. The report dated 07.12.2022 of the Motor Vehicles Inspector revealed that the petitioner overtook a bus through left hand side in a dangerous manner. He made a sharp turn to take a U-turn. The deceased scooterist had to apply break abruptly to avoid collision. She lost control over the vehicle and fell down in front of a bus which caused the death of the scooterist.

9. The 4th respondent stated that he had conducted a site inspection on 20.12.2022 and evaluated the CC TV footage, which revealed that findings of the MVI is true and correct. Therefore, the driving licence granted to the petitioner was revoked.

10. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the respondents.

11. The licence granted to the petitioner was revoked as per Ext.P6 order dated 17.02.2023. In Ext.P6, the 4th respondent concluded that the petitioner had driven the vehicle in a very rash and negligent manner. It is the negligence of the petitioner which contributed to the death of a scooterist. The 4th respondent further noted that the petitioner was earlier also involved in a similar case for offence punishable under Section 304A IPC. At that time also, the driving licence of the petitioner was suspended.

Therefore, the petitioner's driving licence was revoked.

12. The petitioner filed appeal against Ext.P6 order before the Deputy Transport Commissioner. The Deputy Transport Commissioner also found that it is the rash driving of the petitioner that resulted in an accident which caused loss of life. The appellate authority also took note of the earlier similar offence committed by the petitioner. The appellate author

Click Here to Read the rest of this document