Prima Facie Evidence Connecting Accused To Offending Vehicle In Accident Cases Necessary To Frame Charges U/S 304A IPC: J&K High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that it is not open to the trial magistrate to frame charges against an accused without sifting the material collected on record for the limited purpose of framing opinion as to whether a prima facie case is made against the accused.

The court was dealing with an accident case wherein a pedestrian had succumbed to the injuries caused by a vehicle allegedly driven by the accused/petitioner

The court held that there was no evidence on record which connects the accused person with vehicle with which the offence causing death by negligence was committed.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar said that if the material on record is accepted as it is, without rebutting it, the same is not sufficient to presume that accused has not committed the offence nor does it raise any grave suspicion on the involvement in the occurrence.

The court observed that the investigating agency has not collected any material to show that the registered owner had employed the accused as its driver. It also noted That prosecution witness who has got the vehicle released on supurdnama on behalf of registrated owner has also not stated any connection between accused and vehicle.

The court said thay deceased's brother stated that he had seen the petitioner driving the car previously, but not on the day of the accident. Furthermore other witnesses, including police officers and civilians, merely heard from others that the petitioner was involved, making their statements hearsay and inadmissible.

It said that only direct claim linking the petitioner to the crime was his alleged confession to the police, which is inadmissible under Section 25 of the Evidence Act.

The court ruled that the framing of charges by the trial Magistrate was legally unsustainable. The court allowed the petition and the charges against the accused were accordingly quashed.

BACKGROUND:

A Swift Dzire vehicle allegedly driven by accused fatally injured a pedestrian who later on succumbed to the injuries. The driver fled the scene, leaving the vehicle at the accident spot.The police registered FIR No. 32/2020 under Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304-A IPC (causing death by negligence) at Gangyal Police Station, Jammu.

After investigation, police concluded that the petitioner was driving the vehicle and had confessed to the crime.The trial Magistrate framed charges on against accused leading to this petition under Section 482 CrPC challenging the order.

APPEARANCE

Rajeev Chargotra, Advocate for petitioner

P. D. Singh, Dy. AG for Respondents

Case-title: Manohar Singh vs Union Territory of J&K

Citation: 2025 Livelaw (JKL) 115

Click Here To Read/Download Order