Search Results for "rashness and negligence"

302 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 302 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case Due to Erroneous Appreciation of Evidence. Negligence of Driver Established Through Oral Testimony and Site Inspection Report, Entitling Claimant to Compensation Under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

The appellant, Laximan Vithoba Gaunkar, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation of Rs. 2,00,000...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Rash Driving and Death Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Proof of Negligence. Conviction under Sections 279, 304A IPC and Section 187 MV Act Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Establish Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The revision petitioner, Dyaniyal S/o Malku Army, was convicted by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad in C.C. No. 309/2019 for offences under Se...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Conviction for Rash Driving Under IPC Sections 279 and 337 — Conviction Based on Consistent Eyewitness Testimony and Medical Evidence Upheld

The applicant, Hamza Mohd. Ibrahim Ansari, was the original accused in C.C.No.769/P/1987 before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 18th Cou...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of Truck Driver Convicted for Rash and Negligent Driving Causing Death of a Minor. Concurrent findings of fact on identity of driver and rashness upheld; no interference warranted.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of Subhash Chand, who was convicted under Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304-A (causing death by negligence) o...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad Upholds Conviction of Truck Driver in Rash Driving Death Case. Causal Link Between Negligent Driving and Death Established Under Section 304-A IPC.

The applicant, Mahendra Madhukar Jagdale, was the driver of a truck bearing registration No. MH-20-A-6964. On 16 June 2003 at about 3:00 p.m., the com...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Medical Negligence Case — No Causal Link Established Between Treatment and Death. Section 304-A IPC requires proof of rash or negligent act directly causing death; failure to prove beyond reasonable doubt leads to acquittal.

The State of Karnataka appealed against the acquittal of Dr. S. Vijayalaxmi and Dr. K.M. Rajagopal for an offence punishable under Section 304-A read ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision Petition in Rash Driving Death Case — Conviction Under Section 304A IPC Upheld. Evidence of Eye-Witnesses and Medical Reports Establish Negligence Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The case arises from a criminal revision petition filed by the accused, Moulasab, challenging his conviction and sentence by the JMFC-I, Hubli in CC N...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case Due to Negligence of Driver. Claimant awarded compensation for injuries sustained when motorcycle hit her while she was loading luggage on a tempo.

The appellant, Nalini Ramesh Satarkar, filed a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 for injuries sus...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Upholds Conviction of Truck Driver for Causing Death by Negligence — Evidence of Eye-Witness and Spot Panchanama Sufficient. Rear Wheel of Truck Passed Over Deceased's Head, Proving Rash Driving Under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC.

The applicant-accused, Mahendra Madhukar Jagdale, a truck driver, was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pathardi, in S.C.C. No. 225 of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Acquits KSRTC Driver in Road Accident Case Due to Lack of Rash or Negligent Driving Evidence. Conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Culpable Rashness or Negligence Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The appellant, Mohammad Hanif Jainum Khalifa, was a driver employed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC). He was tried and convic...