JUDGMENT

Murray-Aynsley J:

It is only necessary to refer to one Indian Case an that is the case of Idu Bej reported in 3 Allahabad 776. He submits that all the authorities clearly show that to justify a conviction under s. 304A there must be wicked or gross negligence. Brodie, Assistant legal advisor for the respondent: To take a car out on the road with its brakes so maladjusted as to cause the car to swing violently across the road whenever the brakes are applied with any force is an act of gross negligence for which, whatever standard of negligence is adopted as the proper one, the accused is punishable under the Penal Code. He refers to Empress vs Bhutan, 1894, 16 All 472.

This appeal gives rise to an interesting point of law namely whether the degree of negligence required to support a conviction under s. 304A of the Penal Code is the same as that required to support a conviction for manslaughter under English Law. The text book writers and the Indian decisions seem to support the view that they do. But it appears to me to be dangerous to construe the Penal Code and similar Enactments by reference to similar provisions of English Law. Those responsible for the drafting of the