Changing lanes without indication is rash driving: Court
3 Dec 2014 11:50 PM GMT
Additional Sessions Judge Pawan Kumar Jain’s remarks came while acquitting a bus driver, Kishan Lal, facing trial in a negligent driving case. According to prosecution, on March 4, 1999, a car hit the bus driven by Lal from the rear near Karol Bagh bus terminal here in which its driver, complainant Manmohan Bedi had suffered grievous injuries.
Bedi, in his complaint, alleged the bus driver had started his bus without giving any indication and turned his bus towards right side at very high speed, and consequently, Bedi applied his brakes but could not stop the car and rammed the bus. The court held that there was a possibility that Bedi was driving his car at a high speed and after finding the bus in front of him, he lost his control and rammed into the bus. “No doubt in a moving traffic, changing of lane without giving proper indication to the traffic coming from behind amounts negligence or rashness,” the court said in order dated
28 November.
The court noted the testimony of Bedi and said that it is crystal clear that he was coming from behind, the bus was ahead of him and in a stationary position.
“Since, he was coming from behind, it was his duty to maintain proper distance from the bus,” the court said and set aside a magisterial court order, which has convicted Lal under the charges dealing with rash driving.
The court said that it was not clear which lane was the bus in, prior to the accident, hence, “it is difficult to draw any inference qua the negligence of the bus driver.”
Bedi, in his complaint, alleged the bus driver had started his bus without giving any indication and turned his bus towards right side at very high speed, and consequently, Bedi applied his brakes but could not stop the car and rammed the bus. The court held that there was a possibility that Bedi was driving his car at a high speed and after finding the bus in front of him, he lost his control and rammed into the bus. “No doubt in a moving traffic, changing of lane without giving proper indication to the traffic coming from behind amounts negligence or rashness,” the court said in order dated
28 November.
The court noted the testimony of Bedi and said that it is crystal clear that he was coming from behind, the bus was ahead of him and in a stationary position.
“Since, he was coming from behind, it was his duty to maintain proper distance from the bus,” the court said and set aside a magisterial court order, which has convicted Lal under the charges dealing with rash driving.
The court said that it was not clear which lane was the bus in, prior to the accident, hence, “it is difficult to draw any inference qua the negligence of the bus driver.”
Next Story
