Acquittal In A Criminal Case Does Not Lead To An Automatic Inference That There Was No Negligence On The Part Of The Driver: Madras HC [Read Order]

Before Justice J. Nisha Banu, it was contended that the driver of the vehicle was acquitted in the criminal case, and it clearly proved that he was not responsible for the accident and vehicle had not involved in the accident.

A division bench order which rejected a similar contention was brought to the notice of the bench. In the said case, the High Court had rejected the contention that since the criminal case had ended in acquittal, therefore, the civil suit must follow suit. The requirements of culpable rashness under Section 304A, I.P.C. is more drastic than negligence sufficient under the law of tort to create liability, it was held in that case.

The court also took note of another High Court observation [in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., v. K.Balasubramanian] that the judgments of the Criminal Courts are neither binding on the Civil Court/Motor Accident Claims Tribunal no relevant in a Civil Case or a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, except for the limited purpose of showing that there was a criminal prosecution which ended in conviction or acquittal.

Referring to these judgments, the Court dismissed the contention and said:

"From the above decision, it is clear that the acquittal in a criminal case does not lead to an automatic inference that there was no negligence on the part of the driver / rider of the vehicle. Further, the acquittal of the driver in the criminal case will have no bearing on the findings to be recorded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal."

Click here to Download Order

Read Order