Claimant's Guilty Plea To Rash Driving Acts As Admission Of Negligence, Disentitles Him To Accident Compensation: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has held that where a claimant has pleaded guilty in a criminal case arising out of a motor accident, such a plea amounts to an admission that the accident occurred due to his rash and negligent driving. The Court observed that while the effect of a finding recorded in a criminal case may stand on a different footing, a voluntary plea of guilt by the claimant himself can be relied upon to hold him wholly responsible for the accident.Justice Ravindra Maithani was hearing an appeal filed against an award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kashipur, rejecting a claim petition filed under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The appellant had claimed that on 1 July 2011, while riding his motorcycle on the Jaspur-Nadehi Road, another motorcycle being driven rashly and negligently on the wrong side hit him, causing injuries. He sought compensation of ₹6 lakh. The respondent-owner and driver denied the allegations and contended that it was the appellant who was driving his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner while intoxicated. An FIR was lodged against the appellant, a charge sheet was filed, and a criminal case was instituted against him under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 IPC. The respondent further contended that the appellant had pleaded guilty in the criminal case.The Tribunal held that since the appellant had pleaded guilty in the criminal case arising out of the accident, he was himself 100 per cent responsible for the accident and therefore not entitled to compensation. Aggrieved by the rejection of his claim petition, the appellant approached the High Court.Before the High Court, the appellant argued that findings recorded in a criminal proceeding cannot be relied upon in motor accident claim proceedings. It was also contended that the FIR lodged against him was not maintainable because a report regarding the same incident had already been lodged by him.The Court observed that the issue was not merely the effect of findings recorded in a criminal case. It noted that the appellant had himself pleaded guilty on 24 December 2011 in the criminal case arising out of the FIR lodged by the respondent. The Court held that this was not a finding recorded by the criminal court after trial, but an admission by the appellant himself that the accident occurred due to his rash and negligent driving.“The appellant himself has pleaded guilty that the cause of accident is his rash and negligent driving. It is not finding recorded by the court, it is plead guilty by the appellant. Therefore, this Court is of view that the Tribunal has rightly held that it is the appellant, who is 100 percent responsible for the accident…,” the Court observed. Finding no reason to interfere with the impugned award, the Court dismissed the appeal.Case Title: Ashok Kumar v. Yogesh Kumar [Appeal From Order No. 680 of 2015]Click Here To Read/Download Order

Claimant's Guilty Plea To Rash Driving Acts As Admission Of Negligence, Disentitles Him To Accident Compensation: Uttarakhand High Court

Saksham Vaishya

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Saksham Vaishya

Claimant's Guilty Plea To Rash Driving Acts As Admission Of Negligence, Disentitles Him To Accident Compensation: Uttarakhand High Court

Saksham Vaishya

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Saksham Vaishya

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers