In its order of December 22, 2008, the HC had equated the Motor Vehicles (MV) Act with IPC and held that the police could not prosecute a road traffic offender under IPC and MV Act simultaneously.
The Supreme Court has struck down an absurd order passed by the Gauhati High Court that gave immunity to persons involved in motor accident deaths or injuries from any prosecution under the Indian Penal Code.
In its order of December 22, 2008, the HC had equated the Motor Vehicles (MV) Act with IPC and held that the police could not prosecute a road traffic offender under IPC and MV Act simultaneously. This restrained the functioning of the police in Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram and Assam.
Realising the damage caused by the HC decision, Justices Indu Malhotra and Sanjiv Khanna said, "With rapidly increasing motorisation, India is facing an increasing burden of road traffic injuries and fatalities,...the punishment of offenders of motor vehicle accidents under the IPC is stricter and proportionate to the offence committed as compared to the MV Act."
CASE FILE
|
- In its order of December 2008, the Gauhati HC had equated the MV Act with IPC and held that the police could not prosecute a road traffic offender under IPC and MV Act simultaneously
|
Although the HC decision was stayed by the Supreme Court in May 2009 on an appeal filed by Arunachal Pradesh and Tripura, yet it was left to the apex court to decide whether the law laid down by the HC was a good or bad law. The issue comes at a time when the Centre is making efforts to raise awareness of road safety and has rolled out hefty fines for infractions.
To ensure the HC decision is rubbished once and for all, the apex court compared the two legislations. The judges noted that the MV Act and IPC operate in "independent" spheres without any overlap and hence, a road accident offender may be punished independently under both laws.
Assuming the HC order was to be implemented, then a person accused of causing death due to rash and negligent driving would be punishable for up to six months under the MV Act, which allows an offender to pay fine and avoid imprisonment. Under the IPC, the same offence would earn the offender a jail term up to 10 years. Moreover, the MV Act only provides for offences for driving rashly or in an inebriated state but does not cater to the consequences of such an act leading to injury or even death.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Accident")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}