New Delhi: Merely because a vehicle is being driven at high speed and is involved in an accident does not inevitably mean the driver was rash or negligent, Delhi High Court has observed while upholding the acquittal of a tempo driver accused of causing a woman’s death in a 2009 road accident.Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha concurred with the findings of the trial court and said the prosecution had failed to establish beyond doubt that the accused was driving rashly or negligently when his tempo allegedly hit a bicycle, leading to the woman’s death. Her son was cited as an eyewitness.“The mere occurrence of a road traffic incident resulting in a fatality cannot, by itself, lead to an inference of rashness or negligence on the part of the driver,” the court observed in an order passed Tuesday.Referring to the eyewitness’s claim that the tempo was moving at a high speed, the court said: “‘High speed’ or ‘over speed’ are relative terms. It is for the prosecution to bring on record material to establish as to what is meant by ‘high speed’ in the facts and circumstances of the case,” the court said.HC reiterated that in a criminal trial, the prosecution must prove every ingredient of the alleged offence, while the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.“In the absence of any material on record, no presumption of ‘rashness’ or ‘negligence’ can be drawn,” it observed.The court also flagged inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence. It noted that the eyewitness claimed he was thrown onto the road after the impact but did not suffer any injuries. “This appears highly unlikely, because if a person is thrown onto the road, in all probability there would be some abrasion or contusion,” the court said.HC also questioned the mechanical inspection report, which recorded only a slight dent on the tempo’s left side. It noted that the witness had said the tempo came from the opposite direction and struck the bicycle on its left side. “If the incident had occurred in the manner deposed by PW5, the impact would ordinarily have resulted in damage to the right side of the offending vehicle,” the court said.
