The Delhi High Court has made it clear that merely driving at high speed does not automatically mean that a driver was acting in a rash or negligent manner.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee discharged a man who was accused of driving at high speed and allegedly hitting two pedestrians, who later succumbed to their injuries. The Court stated that simply driving fast does not confirm the presence of recklessness or negligence on the driver’s part.
Read also: Delhi High Court Orders Removal of 'Purplle Tree' from Trademark Register
"Even if it is assumed that the petitioner was driving at a high speed, it does not necessarily mean that he was driving in a rash and negligent manner," observed Justice Banerjee.
The case revolved around a trial court's decision that convicted the accused under:
- Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Rash and negligent driving
- Section 304A of the IPC – Causing death by negligence
The trial court had sentenced him to two years of rigorous imprisonment. However, when the case reached the High Court, Justice Banerjee ruled that there was no concrete evidence proving that the man was driving in a rash and negligent manner.
Read also: Delhi HC Permanently Stops Rogue Website from Using L'Oreal's Trademark, Orders ₹ 1 Lakh Cost
The Court pointed out several gaps in the prosecution's case:
- There was no clear definition of what constituted "high speed" in this case.
- No evidence was presented to show the exact speed at which the accused was driving.
- Witnesses did not clearly state that the driver was reckless or negligent.
"There was an overall infirmity and unfilled lacunae in the prosecution's case, and they failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the petitioner was driving rashly or negligently," the Court remarked.
Read also: Heir of Maharaja Karni Singh Moves Delhi High Court Seeking Rent Arrears for Bikaner House
Furthermore, the Court emphasized that just because the car hit two pedestrians and led to their deaths, it does not automatically mean the driver was guilty of reckless driving.
"Merely because the car, allegedly being driven at a high speed, hit two pedestrians leading to their demise, it is not adequate for a Court of law to hold that the petitioner was being rash and negligent," the judgment read.
Based on these findings, the Delhi High Court set aside the conviction and ruled in favor of the accused. The judgment reinforces the principle that driving at high speed alone is not enough to establish rash or negligent driving unless there is strong evidence proving recklessness.
This ruling highlights the importance of clear evidence and proper definitions in traffic law cases, ensuring that drivers are not unfairly convicted based on mere assumptions.
Title: MANISH KUMAR v. STATE
