NEW DELHI:
In a significant judgment that underscores the importance of maintaining safe distance on roads, the Supreme Court has held that sudden braking or tailgating could render a person liable in the event of an accident. The verdict comes in the backdrop of a tragic road mishap involving a bike, a car and a bus, which resulted in the biker sustaining 100% disability.
A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar ruled that applying emergency brakes abruptly or trailing a moving vehicle too closely without maintaining adequate distance can make a driver responsible if it leads to a collision. The court said all three parties involved in the incident, the biker, the car driver, and the bus driver were at fault.
The case pertained to a young engineering student who collided with a car that had suddenly applied brakes. Upon falling from his bike, he was hit by a bus, which led to grievous injuries and the amputation of his leg. The incident had earlier been examined by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which had exonerated the car driver and attributed negligence to the biker and bus driver in the ratio of 20:80.
The Supreme Court, however, disapproved of the tribunal's findings. It was determined that the driver was also careless for abruptly applying the brakes without a good reason in the middle of the road. The court dismissed the car owner's argument that he had to stop because his pregnant wife was throwing up.
The bench noted that the bus driver's careless response and the biker's failure to keep a safe distance both contributed to the biker's serious injuries. For contributory negligence, the court divided the culpability in the following proportions: 20% went to the biker, 30% to the bus driver, and 50% to the car driver.
The victim received ₹1.14 crore in compensation from the Supreme Court, but 20% was to be withheld because of his partial involvement in the incident. Additionally, it mandated that the insurers of the car and bus, who were both insured at the time of the accident, be held financially responsible based on the level of negligence.
The decision sends a clear message about reckless driving and emphasizes the shared responsibility of all users of the road. This decision, according to legal experts, is significant because it emphasizes the need for vigilance, particularly in situations involving heavy traffic or delicate road conditions.
