Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court's Quashing of Final Report in Car Accident Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of India has overturned the quashing of a final report in a car accident case by the High Court. The case involved a car accident that resulted in multiple deaths, and the final report had concluded that the accident was unavoidable and not due to negligence on the part of the deceased. The High Court had quashed the report, attributing negligence to the deceased.

In its judgement, the Supreme Court criticized the High Court's approach, stating, "The opinions expressed which are in the nature of findings while considering the correctness or otherwise of the final report submitted on further investigation of the case and thereby quashing the same is, in our view, not a correct and proper approach adopted by the High Court."

The Supreme Court further clarified that the quashing of the report would not impact the criminal proceeding as it had already abated due to the death of the accused. However, the Court emphasized that in the pending compensation claim petitions, the burden of proving negligence lies on the claimants, and it should be established based on preponderance of possibilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.

"It is for the Appellant herein to establish negligence on the part of the driver of the tanker lorry in the petition filed by him seeking compensation on account of the death of his son in the said accident," the judgement stated.

The Court also referred to previous cases, highlighting that in compensation claim petitions, the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt does not apply, and the claimants must establish their case based on preponderance of probabilities.

Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeal. The opinion in the final report was deemed to have no bearing on the compensation claim petitions. Each party was directed to bear their respective costs.

This judgement provides clarity on the burden of proof in compensation claim petitions arising from car accidents and emphasizes the need for a holistic evaluation of evidence to determine negligence.                                                             

Date of Decision: July 13, 2023

Mathew Alexander  vs Mohammed Shafi and Anr.

Latest Legal News