'High Speed' Not Enough To Prove Rashness Or Negligence In Driving: Himachal Pradesh

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has observed that a vehicle being at high speed is not enough, by itself, to prove the driver’s rashness or negligence. The court noted that speed is a relative term and must be explained with reference to the facts and circumstances of each case.

The court was hearing a case regarding a collision between a bus and truck, and both claimed that both vehicles were moving at high speed. Due to the speed, the drivers could not control the vehicles, leading to the collision. Police, upon investigation, found that the incident occurred due to the negligence of the truck driver, who was intoxicated at the time of the accident.

Read Also: Major Rule Changes Coming On June 1: Driving Licenses, Aadhaar Updates And Many More

The police then filed a case before the Trial Court for offenses under Sections 279 (rash driving) and 337 (causing harm by an act endangering the life or personal safety of others) of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 181 (driving without a valid licence) and 187 (failing to give information or report an accident) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

In the case, a trial court convicted the accused, holding that records proved that the truck was driven at high speed. The court found that the driver of the bus stopped his vehicle after seeing that the truck was coming at high speed. But the truck did not stop, causing the collision.

Read Also: A Year After Pune Porsche Accident, Grieving Families Still Await Justice

However, while hearing the case, Justice Rakesh Kainthla held that the accused cannot be held liable based on high speed alone without any further evidence that the accused was in breach of his duty to take care, which he had failed to do.

Last year, the Kerala High Court observed a similar ruling upholding a conviction imposed upon an accused under Section 304 Part II of the IPC for causing the death of a motorbike rider by driving his car on the wrong side of the road after consuming alcohol beyond the permissible limit.

While delivering the verdict, the court ruled that driving at high speed by itself doesn’t mean that the accused was rash or negligent.