Driver Acquitted as Court Finds Child’s Unexpected Road Crossing Made Accident Unavoidable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal

Himachal Pradesh High Court upheld the acquittal of Hans Raj, a driver accused of causing the death of a child in a 2008 road accident. The State's appeal against the trial court's judgment was dismissed, with the High Court ruling that the tragic accident resulted from the child’s sudden crossing of the road and was not caused by any negligence on the part of the driver. The court emphasized that no reasonable steps could have been taken by the driver to prevent the incident.

The accident took place on June 13, 2008, when a pick-up truck driven by Hans Raj struck a child on the Jubbal-Kotkhai road in Shimla district. According to the child’s mother, Amita Nanda, who was walking with him, the vehicle was traveling at high speed and hit the child as they were heading towards a shop. Despite efforts to get him medical attention, the child succumbed to his injuries on the way to the hospital. Hans Raj was charged with rash and negligent driving under Sections 279 and 304A of the IPC but was acquitted by the trial court in 2010. The prosecution appealed the acquittal, arguing that the driver was at fault due to his alleged high speed.

The main legal issue in the appeal was whether Hans Raj’s driving was negligent and caused the accident, or if the child’s sudden and unforeseeable movement into the road absolved him of responsibility.

The State argued that the driver was speeding in a busy area and failed to stop after hitting the child. However, the defense pointed out, and the court noted, that several witnesses, including Ramesh Chand (an occupant of the vehicle) and Sandeep Kumar (a police officer on duty nearby), testified that the child abruptly left his mother’s hand and ran into the road, making it impossible for the driver to prevent the accident.

Inconsistent Testimonies: Witnesses gave conflicting accounts of the vehicle's speed. While some said it was speeding, others, including eyewitnesses and the driver himself, stated the vehicle was moving at a normal pace, particularly given that it was loaded with goods. The court noted that no clear definition of “high speed” was provided by the prosecution, making the allegations weak.

Sudden Crossing: The defense emphasized that the child unexpectedly ran into the road. Witnesses, including defense witness Pradeep Dopta, confirmed this, making the accident unavoidable. The court supported this version, highlighting the impossibility for the driver to react quickly enough to prevent the tragedy.

Legal Precedents: The court referred to several precedents, including State of Karnataka v. Satish, which clarified that merely alleging high speed does not prove negligence. The court reiterated that sudden actions by pedestrians can lead to accidents, and drivers cannot always be held accountable for such unforeseen movements.

The High Court concurred with the trial court's assessment, holding that Hans Raj could not be held liable for the accident. The court cited the principle from Mahadeo Hari Lokre v. State of Maharashtra:

“If a person suddenly crosses the road, the bus driver, however slowly he may be driving, may not be in a position to avoid the accident. Therefore, it will not be possible to hold that the bus driver was negligent.”

Further, the court noted the lack of supporting evidence for the mother’s claim that the driver was intoxicated, which undermined her testimony.

The High Court ruled that the trial court’s decision to acquit Hans Raj was reasonable and based on the evidence presented. The court found no compelling reason to overturn the acquittal, reinforcing the legal standard that negligence cannot be presumed without clear evidence, especially in cases involving sudden pedestrian movements. The appeal was dismissed, and the driver’s acquittal stood.

Date of decision: 30/09/2024

State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Hans Raj