Pedestrian jaywalking led to road death, says HC in driver acquittal

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: The driver of a car who was sentenced to six months imprisonment for causing the death of a pedestrian crossing the road has been acquitted by the High Court.

The HC found that the victim was trying to cross the road where there was no Zebra Crossing and had jumped over a divider.

“The driver is not expected to anticipate the pedestrian crossing by jumping the road divider and hence, the rash and negligent act cannot be attributed to the driver of the offending vehicle,” Justice Rajendra Badamikar said while acquitting G Vishwanath, who was driving the offending vehicle.

The accident took place on February 28, 2017 at 6.25 am when Vishwanath was driving his car down the National College Flyover in Basavanagudi.

A woman who was trying to cross the road on the downward ramp of the flyover was hit by the car and later succumbed to her injuries. Vishwanath had helped to shift her to the hospital.

A Trial Court found him guilty under Sections 279 (rash driving or riding on a public way) and 304A (causing death by negligence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Vishwanath was imposed a sentence of six months imprisonment and Rs.3,000 fine under Section 304A and a fine of Rs 1,000 for the offence under Section 297.

A Sessions Court upheld the conviction after which he approached the HC in 2019. The HC gave its judgement recently. The HC in its judgement said that the victim was responsible for the accident.

“The deceased ought not to have crossed the road when there is no provision for crossing the road. The entire road was divided by road divider and there is no provision for pedestrians to cross the road. In spite of that, the deceased crossed one road and she came from the Bank of Maharashtra Circle and jumped the divider and without waiting, suddenly came across the road in order to move towards Jyothi Prakash Stores on the southern side, which resulted in the accident,” the HC noted.

The lower courts had based their verdict on the fact that the speed of the car at the time of accident was 80 kms per hour. The HC said speed was not the only criteria to look at.

“The Courts below have erred in holding that the accident is because of actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle. Both the Courts below did not appreciate the evidence in proper perspective and in a mechanical way proceeded to convict the accused only on the ground that he was driving the offending vehicle and the accident has been admitted. The speed is not the criteria for deciding rash and negligent act and the evidence falls short of proving actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle,” the HC said.

Setting aside the orders of the lower court and acquitting Vishwanath, the HC said, “Under these circumstances, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by both the Courts below needs to be set aside. As such, point under consideration is answered in the affirmative as both the Courts have erroneously convicted the accused.” (CrRP 1031/2019)