#traffic accident

Karnataka High Court rules that eyewitness testimony from relatives of the deceased is valid under Sections 279 and 304A IPC if found credible and uncontradicted, even without corroboration. The accused's silence during Section 313 CrPC examination further strengthened the prosecution's case, setting a precedent for traffic accident convictions based on interested witness accounts.

Karnataka High Court ruled that mere absence of a driving licence does not establish rash or negligent driving under Section 304(A) IPC. The court quashed the chargesheet against a deceased motorcyclist, emphasizing that criminal liability requires proof of actual negligence, not just procedural violations. This sets a precedent for traffic accident cases where licence status is misused to infer guilt.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that minor discrepancies in witness testimonies-such as variations in distance estimates-do not invalidate a conviction under Section 304-A IPC if the core allegation of rash and negligent driving is consistently established. The court reduced the sentence to a fine, emphasizing that prolonged litigation should not unduly burden the accused while upholding accountability for fatal road accidents.