Parminder Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh - (High Court of Himachal Pradesh) (18 Jul 2016)

Court sponsored rule-flouting? Overloading and absent helmet not considered for contributory negligence

MANU/HP/0650/2016

Criminal

A refusal of the Himachal Pradesh High Court to take seriously overloading of two-wheel vehicles and non-wearing of helmet by riders while assessing contributory negligence in death due to road accident may discourage an already recalcitrant public.

Three persons, including the deceased, were riding on a scooter, which was struck by a three-wheeler coming from the opposite direction driven by the petitioner. Lower courts had found the petitioner’s driving to be negligent and the primary cause of the accident - a conclusion that was accepted by the high court.

However, the court also observed a lack of evidence suggesting negligence on part of the scooter driver even though it was admitted that he was carrying two additional persons. Under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, a scooter, in its normal configuration may be ridden by the driver and only one pillion. The court opined, “every violation of Motor Vehicle Act and Rules framed thereunder cannot be treated as a contributory negligence for the accident.”

As for the cause of death of one of the scooter passengers who died from severe head injuries, it was concluded that “There is no question that head injury of deceased was due to non-wearing of helmet by deceased”.

Illegalities perpetrated by the scooter rider, however, failed to sway the court to relax punishment meted out to the driver of the three-wheeler. Its only concession, to reduce the duration of imprisonment and fine imposed.

Relevant : Guru Basavaraj Alias Benne Settappa v. State of Karnataka MANU/SC/0682/2012 B. Nagabhushanam v. State of Karnataka MANU/SC/7688/2008 State of Punjab vs. Saurabh Bakshi MANU/SC/0362/2015

Tags : SCOOTER OVERLOADED HELMET CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE