Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has held that proving rash driving is not essential to establish criminal negligence under Section 304A IPC, while upholding the conviction of a private bus driver for causing a fatal road accident.
The court, however, reduced his jail term and directed him to pay Rs 1 lakh to the surviving legal heirs of the victim.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das made the observation while deciding an appeal filed by Mahammad Saidul Shaikh, who was found guilty of causing the death of scooterist Debu Prasad Mitra in September 2009. The trial court had sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment for negligent driving.
Delivering the judgment, the High Court noted that the prosecution had proved the essential ingredients of negligence even though there was no conclusive evidence of rash driving. “The act of hitting a scooter from behind without maintaining reasonable distance clearly shows negligence,” the court said.
It added that rash driving was not a necessary precondition to hold a person criminally negligent if there was failure to exercise due care.
The court relied on testimonies from two eyewitnesses who lived near the accident site and a traffic guard who chased the fleeing bus and identified the driver. The mechanical inspection ruled out any defect in the vehicle, and the post-mortem confirmed that the victim died of injuries sustained in the impact.
Justice Das also noted lapses in the investigation, including the failure to examine the bus conductor, but clarified that such omissions did not weaken the prosecution’s case. “Negligence is determined not by speed alone but by the absence of reasonable caution expected of a prudent driver,” the judgment observed.
Considering the long passage of time since the incident and the driver’s financial condition, the High Court reduced the sentence to one year’s imprisonment and directed payment of Rs 1 lakh within six weeks.
The amount will operate as a substitute for a longer custodial term, failing which the one-year sentence will be enforced. The trial court has been instructed to ensure compliance and confirm payment within two weeks of deposit.