Not justified to hold driver guilty of offence involving moral turpitude in road accidents: HC

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court made it clear that in cases involving road accidents, there is no justificstion to hold a driver guilty of an offence involving moral turpitude.
The HC passed these orders while converting the dismissal of a driver of Punjab transport department, who was involved in a road accident, from one of dismissal from service to premature, compulsory retirement.
“Often, road accidents are the result of an error of judgment or mechanical failures. They can also occur on account of the fault of the other vehicle. In such cases, it would not be justified or rational to hold that the driver is guilty of an offence involving moral turpitude in the absence of mens rea (intention to commit an act); however, at the same time, the court is required to take into consideration the fact that the driver, if reinstated in service, will again drive heavy duty vehicles which can endanger public safety,” Justice Anil Kshetarpal held in a recently-released order while hearing a petition filed by Darshan Singh, a heavy vehicle driver in the Punjab transport department.
The driver sought directions from the HC to quash an order, dated April 12, 2016, passed by the director of state transport, Punjab, dismissing him from service.
The petitioner was dismissed from service after his conviction in a case of rash and negligent driving registered on May 30, 2008, at Kurali police station in Punjab’s Ropar district. He had joined the department in June 1997.
During the hearing of the case, the state government admitted that before the occurrence of the accident in question, the petitioner was driving heavy duty vehicles without any such incident having been reported in the past.
The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT), as well as the criminal court, however, had found him guilty of rash and negligent driving.
The bench also noticed that the petitioner completed more than 15 years of service as required for the application of the Punjab Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1975, which were amended in 2014.
After examining and harmonising these conflicting interests, the HC held that in such cases, the order of dismissal is required to be modified and converted into an order of compulsory, premature retirement from service, with entitlement to retrial, pensionary benefits.
The HC directed the Punjab government to consider the petitioner as compulsory retired instead of being dismissed from service, with entitlement to retrial benefits with effect from the date of the dismissal order.