MUNI DEVI Vs. ISHWAR DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is against the dismissal of the claim petition filed by the legal representatives of a male aged 32 years died in motor vehicle accident. It was stated in the claim petition that on 09.09.1992 when he was travelling in a Haryana Roadways bus bearing No.HNM -1742 on the way to his village Kakoriya from Rewari, the deceased had requested to the conductor of the bus to stop the bus near the farm house of Lal Singh -Ex -Sarpanch. At this, the driver and conductor of the bus had allegedly got annoyed but at the persuasion of other passengers, the driver stopped the bus in front of the farm house and when in order to alight the bus the deceased had kept his only one step on the ground, the driver started the bus on account of which the deceased had lost his balance and fell down on the ground after hitting against the bus. After seeing him falling on the ground, Hoshiar Singh Balwant Singh resident of Jaitpur -Sekhapur and Bhoop Singh son of Mukhtyar Singh resident of Mauja Rehnuwa got stopped the alleged offending vehicle and rushed the injured Bishambhar Dayal to the Civil Hospital, Rewari where he succumbed to the injuries. He was said to be working as a mason and earning Rs.3500/ - per month. It was also alleged in the claim petition that the FIR was got registered at the instance of one Davinder Singh working in the Haryana Roadways, who gave a false narration of the facts and stated that the accident had been caused by an unknown four wheeler. The claimants had also gave a complaint under Sections 279 and 304A IPC to the JMIC against respondent No.1, driver of the bus for causing death due to his rash and negligent driving.

(2.) THE respondent No. 1 in his written statement against the claim petition admitted the fact that on the date of accident he was driving bus No.HNM -1742 and the deceased was travelling in the bus for going to his village Kakoriya. He further stated that the deceased requested to stop the bus near the house of ex -Sarpanch for some personal work and after alighting from the bus, when he was trying to cross the road in front of the bus, an unknown four wheeler coming from Rewari side hit him and run away towards Pataudi. The respondent No.1 had further claimed that he had chased the vehicle for about 10 kms but could not intercept the said vehicle nor he could note down the number of the vehicle due to darkness. After a failed chase, he came back to the site of accident and the injured was taken to the Civil Hospital, Rewari in his own bus on humanitarian ground. After admitting the injured, the respondent No.1 left behind Davinder and two other passengers in the hospital and proceeded towards Pataudi with other passengers.

(3.) IN a typical situation of the vehicle having run over the deceased, the driver himself would have fled from the place after abandoning the vehicle. In this case, however, the fact that the driver had proceeded in hot pursuit and come back to the spot and made an attempt to save the life by taking the deceased in his own vehicle to the hospital would vindicate the truth of the contentions raised by the driver. If there are two views possible, I would adopt the view which was considered by the Tribunal as more appropriate for affirmation.