Search Results for "rash and negligent driving"

1368 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1368 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Revision, Sets Aside Conviction in Fatal Jeep Accident Case Due to Unproven Medical Evidence and Unreliable Witnesses. The court held that reversal of acquittal was unjustified when post-mortem report was not proved and only one eyewitness supported the prosecution.

The applicant, Anita Sopan Ravalekar, was initially acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhor, for offences under Sections 279, 304A, 337...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition, Discharges Accused in Culpable Homicide Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence of Knowledge or Intent. Court holds that mere involvement in a road accident without evidence of rash or negligent driving does not attract Section 304 Part II IPC.

The revision petitioner, Kolla Bhovi, was the driver of a lorry involved in a road accident on 20.01.2013, resulting in the death of a cyclist. The co...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Partly Allows BMTC Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Due to Contributory Negligence of Deceased Motorcyclist. Liability Apportioned Equally Between BMTC and Deceased, Compensation Reduced to Rs.39,55,000/- with 6% Interest.

The appeal was filed by the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC) challenging the judgment and award dated 17.09.2016 passed by the IX A...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction of Bus Driver in Fatal Accident Case. Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts on rash and negligent driving causing death of four persons under Sections 279, 337, and 304-A IPC affirmed.

The appellant, Thangasamy, was convicted by the Trial Court for offences under Sections 279, 337 (3 counts), and 304-A (4 counts) of the Indian Penal ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Rash Driving Causing Death and Injuries in Hit-and-Run Case. Revision Petitioner's Conviction Under Sections 279, 337, 304A IPC and Section 134(a)(b) r/w 187 MV Act Confirmed as Evidence of Rashness and Negligence Was Clear.

The revision petitioner, Mr. Vimanjan Hanumanta Devarkonda, was the original accused in a criminal case arising from a road accident that occurred on ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case Due to Erroneous Rejection of Petition Under Section 163A MV Act — Claimants Entitled to Compensation as Per Structured Formula Despite Alleged Contributory Negligence.

The appellants, Ashabai, Seema, and Umesh, are the legal representatives of the deceased Kalyan Kothi. They filed a claim petition under Section 163A ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Bus Driver in Rash Driving Case Due to Lack of Evidence of Negligence. Conviction under Sections 304(A) and 279 IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Rash or Negligent Driving Causing Death.

The case involves a criminal revision application filed by Bashir Janubhai Pathan, who was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Pathardi, for o...