If mishap occurs due to negligence of pedestrian, no criminal liability can be fixed on vehicle: Mumbai Court acquits accused for rash driving

A Mumbai Court recently acquitted a 56-year old woman accused of rash and negligent driving case holding that if any mishap happened due to negligence of the pedestrian no criminal liability can be fixed on the vehicle owner (State of Maharashtra v. Swapnila S Sakhalkar).The accused Swapnila Sakhalkar was accused of rash driving and grievously hurting the complainant Apeksha in 2015.The complainant was walking to her office when a four wheeler came from behind her and rammed into her. Because of the impact she fell down on the road and the front tyre of the car ran over her leg leading to fracture in her leg and thumb.Pursuant to this, the complainant's father filed a complaint with the police, and an FIR came to be registered. .Metropolitan Magistrate Pravin P Deshmane stated that "while crossing or walking the road it is the duty of pedestrian to take precaution. If any mishap happened due to negligence of the pedestrian no criminal liability would be fixed on the vehicle.".The Prosecution argued that there was evidence to show that the accused was negligent due to which the accident occurred. Advocate Bhushan Deshmukh, representing Sahalkar, opposed the submission arguing that there was no established evidence to hold that the accused was driving car at relevant time and there was no evidence at all to show negligent or rashness on the part of lady driver..The court came to the conclusion that the complainant failed to specify her exact location on the road and also failed to explain the reason for not using footpath meant for pedestrians. "The evidence of informant is vague and general without specifying the exact causal factor attributing negligence or rashness on the part of said lady car driver," the Court opined. The Court also said that had there been independent witness, the true facts would have been come on record to attribute not only involvement of accused, but also the causal factor of the accident.Perusing the entire evidence the Court opined that "there is nothing trustworthy to fix the involvement of the accused in the alleged accident and no substantial particulars put forth to establish the negligence driving of the alleged vehicle.".[Read Order]