Delay in lodging an FIR in motor accident claims is not fatal if the claimant provides cogent reasons, such as serious injury and hospitalization, and the accident is supported by medical evidence and police investigation.

Order

1. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned judgment dated 19.02.2019, passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in Motor Accident Claim Case No.180/2017 (NCV No.180/2017) whereby the learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant-injured.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal rejected the claim petition filed by the claimant-appellant on the ground that no documentary evidence was placed by the appellant to support the accident in question.

4. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 02.01.2016 between 11:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon, the appellant-claimant and his relative Majid were going to Pipar City on their Motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ-21-SD-5093 and when they reached near Silari Road between Annaram and Sukharam Bera, a Bolero Camper without registration number came from the opposite side, in a rash and negligent manner, and hit their motorcycle from wrong side, resultantly, they sustained grievous injuries. They were taken to the Community Health Centre, Pipar City for treatment and thereafter they were referred to MDM, Hospital, Jodhpur.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the accident took place on 02.01.2016 in which the injured-claimant got seriously injured. He was immediately, taken to the Community Health Centre, Pipar City for treatment and after the first aid, looking to the serious condition, he was referred to MDM, Hospital, Jodhpur. Thereafter looking to his condition, he was further advised and referred to Government (CL & SC) Spine Institute at Ahmedabad where the appellant-claimant remained admitted for his treatment till 23.02.2016. After the treatment when his condition was improved, he was discharged from the Hospital on 23.02.2016.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that when the health condition of the appellant improved, appellant’s uncle Afraf Khan lodged an FIR at Police Station – Pipar on 13.01.2016 and in the FIR so submitted, it was specifically mentioned that since the appellant-claimant has sustained grievious injuries and he was referred to Jodhpur and then Ahmedabad, the FIR is being lodged at delayed stage. The same facts were also narrated in the claim petition filed before the learned Tribunal. It is further submitted that in the FIR lodged by appellant’s uncle, after thorough investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the competent criminal Court.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Tribunal rejected the claim petition filed by the appellant-claimant only on the ground that the FIR was registered with an inordinate delay of 11 days and no documentary evidence was submitted along with the claim petition as well as during pendency of the claim petition.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Ravi Vs. Badrinarayan & Ors., reported in (2011)4 Supreme Court Cases 693, submitted that delay in lodging the FIR cannot be a ground to doubt the