Sunday, May 19, 2024 | Last Update : 05:35 PM IST

  Metros   Delhi  30 Mar 2018  Delhi Court sets aside jail term of man guilty of rash driving

Delhi Court sets aside jail term of man guilty of rash driving

THE ASIAN AGE.
Published : Mar 30, 2018, 7:31 am IST
Updated : Mar 30, 2018, 7:31 am IST

The deceased was crossing the road. The DND flyover is a pedestrian-free zone.

 The deceased was crossing the road. The DND flyover is a pedestrian-free zone. The deceased himself was negligent while crossing the road. The criminality is not to be presumed merely on the basis of accident.
  The deceased was crossing the road. The DND flyover is a pedestrian-free zone. The deceased himself was negligent while crossing the road. The criminality is not to be presumed merely on the basis of accident.

New Delhi: A Delhi court has set aside the jail term of a man convicted of rash driving and killing a person on the DND flyway, while blaming the victim for negligently crossing the busy road, which is a pedestrian-free zone. 

Additional sessions judge S.K. Gupta acquitted the man, who was driving a Scorpio car on the Delhi-Noida-Delhi expressway at high speed in 2014 and hit a pedestrian while he was crossing the road after using a public toilet there.

"The DND Road is a busy road which connects Delhi to Noida. The deceased was crossing the road. The DND flyover is a pedestrian-free zone. The deceased himself was negligent while crossing the road. The criminality is not to be presumed merely on the basis of accident. There is high movement of the traffic on DND road.,” the jjudge said. 

“The deceased has crossed the road without taking care of the traffic on the road. In such circumstances, it is not possible to save the accident even if the vehicle is at low speed. The appellant (accused) cannot be said to be negligent," he added. 

The order came on the appeal filed by the man against a magisterial court's 2017 decision holding him guilty of the offences of rash driving and causing death by negligence under the IPC. The sessions court refused to rely on the testimony of an eyewitness to the incident and said “the bald testimony” that the appellant was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner was not enough to prove his guilt.

“There is no evidence on record to show the manner in which the man was driving the vehicle to prove his rashness or negligence. The prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond shadow of doubt,” be said. 

Tags: prosecution, ipc, delhi-noida-delhi expressway, criminality