[GKR9900]

I am posting an incident that happened to my friend today.

Today morning, my friend and his wife were travelling in their Xcent. At a place called Tirur, my friend was trying to overtake an autorickshaw. The auto was moving through the left side of the road. As my friend saw ample space, he proceeded with the maneuver. Little did he know that a cyclist was passing through the left side of the auto. The auto driver, totally oblivious to the fact that my friend is overtaking him, jerked his vehicle to the right! The auto hit the Xcent's left rear wheel arch and door. In the shock of the impact, the auto driver swayed the auto to his left knocking down the very cyclist he was trying to evade.
Here's a rough sketch of what happened.

The damage incurred by my friend's car


My friend pulled over. He is a doctor and checked if everyone was ok. The autorickshaw driver was fine, but the cyclist had a cut in his arm and an aching back. In the mental shock of the event and upon seeing that the cyclist was injured, my friend forgot to check the auto driver's ID and registration and rushed the cyclist to Medical College Thrissur (where he is working). He was also accompanied by the cyclist's relative who was present at the accident scene. Preliminary care was given and a scan was advised to which the cyclist and his bystander refused and they demanded discharge. They were discharged against medical advice, went to a private hospital and got admitted there. On investigation, he was found to have a hairline fracture of a vertebra for which rest, immobilization and back brace has been advised. In spite of all these, the dialogue between the involved parties had not been hostile.

Now, the cyclist's family is taking the matter to court. Although the apparent fault lies with the auto driver's negligent driving, the absence of an identity of the involved auto driver has got my friend stressed up. He had gone to the police station which has jurisdiction over the accident area and reported(verbally), the entire event to the Sub Inspector of Police there. The SI has assured him that the cyclist's unfortunate fate cannot be attributed to my friend and that he has nothing to worry. Conversations with the cyclist's bystanders had not been unpleasant, but my friend kind of gets the feeling that they are more interested in accusing him than the auto driver. They keep pressing that it's only because my friend hit the auto that the auto hit the cyclist. Provided that they proceed with suing my friend, there are two loopholes that can be exploited here.

1. The absence of identity of the auto driver. (Now my friend says that the auto driver was a familiar face among the crowd who gathered at the accident scene, so hopefully, he should be able to ID him)

2. At the Medical College where the cyclist was initially brought (the one where my friend is working), the case file has been reported as 'Brought by relative' and NOT 'Brought by Dr.xxx(my friend)'. Can this be exploited later in the court as a hit and run?

I've already advised him to take a legal opinion just in case.

I request my fellow t-bhpians to kindly shed some light on what can/need to be done in this case

P.S: Mods, kindly forgive if I posted in the wrong thread.

[honeybee]

The marks on the car and the eye witnesses should prove that the car didn't hit the cycle. So I think there is no need to worry. Your friend should probably submit an affidavit or some similar declaration to the police, with his wife as witness, to confirm that the auto hit the car and then hit the bicycle. That should be good enough if the case ever goes to court.

All the argument about the car causing an accident can just not be proven, so ask him not to worry. Do consult a good lawyer to ensure his side of the accident is correctly recorded.

[sparameswaran]

Originally Posted by GKR9900

I am posting an incident that happened to my friend today. .

To be on the safer side, it may be appropriate to do whatever possible to protect your friend from any possibility of being sued. I believe the petitioner can argue that the whole sequence of events was set of by your friend attempting to overtake the auto. Was it an area where overtaking was not permitted by any chance? Did the auto driver signal before moving to the right? Is there any way to prove it, if he did not signal? Is it not possible that the auto driver may alleged that he never tried to turn to the right, instead your friend's car hit him when he was trying to overtake the auto, thus propelling auto to the left side and on to the cyclist?
See, people (and the petitioners lawyer) can twist the issue in any direction, esp because no recorded proof is there for what really happened. Better take preventive steps, if he can.

[GKR9900]

Originally Posted by sparameswaran

Was it an area where overtaking was not permitted by any chance? Did the auto driver signal before moving to the right?.

I believe the area in question does not have any prohibition on overtaking maneuvers. No signals from the auto driver's part though.

Originally Posted by sparameswaran

Is there any way to prove it, if he did not signal? Is it not possible that the auto driver may allege that he never tried to turn to the right, instead your friend's car hit him when he was trying to overtake the auto, thus propelling auto to the left side and on to the cyclist?
See, people (and the petitioners lawyer) can twist the issue in any direction, esp because no recorded proof is there for what really happened. Better take preventive steps, if he can

These are the exact thoughts that has got my friend worked up. There's an apparent lack of any form of recording to prove his version of the incident.

But like honeybee said,

Originally Posted by honeybee

The marks on the car and the eye witnesses should prove that the car didn't hit the cycle.

Wouldn't these be sufficient to prove that the auto hit the car? The impact on the car is at the left rear door and wheel arch. By means of probability, wouldn't it ascertain that it was indeed the auto driver's fault? Also, his wife was also present in the car. She would be the primary witness, I assume. Aren't these strong enough evidences? Forgive me for my ignorance here, as I'm totally dark in this area. If my friend has to prove that it was the auto driver's fault, wouldn't the pattern of impact be considered by the investigation agency? Should he leave the damage as such without fixing? If he's to fix the damage, will the pics and video that we have taken on the day of accident showcasing the damage and the car's registration(in a single frame) suffice? Will this be taken as credible evidence? If my friend is to claim insurance to fix the damage, wouldn't the pics taken by insurance agency be taken as credible evidence?

Any other preventive steps that we can take/we should have taken?

[Turbanator]

it may be appropriate to do whatever possible to protect your friend from any possibility of being sued

These are the exact thoughts that has got my friend worked up.

I am not entirely sure on prevailing Law but why will someone sue driver of Car for this ? As long as your friend's papers - importantly Insurance are in order - he need not even think on such lines - there's a reason why we pay third party premium , only challenge that i see will be for lawyers of cyclists - to get third part claim from your car insurance since he was hit by Auto which remains untraceable or might not have a valid insurance but thats not your concern .

1. The absence of identity of the auto driver. (Now my friend says that the auto driver was a familiar face among the crowd who gathered at the accident scene, so hopefully, he should be able to ID him)

Doesn't matter - police will just mention unidentified Auto in FIR if cyclists wants to press this

To me it looks cyclists and others have sensed an opportunity to get some money from your friend given the kind nature of your friend I don't see any reasons why should your friend pay

[aqualeo2040]

Originally Posted by GKR9900

Now, the cyclist's family is taking the matter to court. Although the apparent fault lies with the auto driver's negligent driving, the absence of an identity of the involved auto driver has got my friend stressed up.

The usual disgusting attitude! After a good Samaritan helped that guy out, they want to make a few quick bucks! And we wonder why people do not stop to help accident victims on the road.

Anyways, in your friend's situation, the case has to be based on evidence.
What evidence does the cyclist have to prove that Dr X crashed into his bike?

Is there any CCTV footage present?

If it's just about eyewitness account, then the cyclist friend cannot bear witness as he is related to the victim and hence can be biased.

Over that, I am assuming that the cycle was not yellow in colour, to have left paint marks on the car.

Ask your friend to get a good lawyer and the lawyer would manage all the evidences.

Going a step back, is there any proof that the accident happened the way it has been described? If there's no CCTV, no neutral eyewitness and no auto-driver, then the cyclist might have as well had a fall by himself and Dr X the good person that he is to his Hippocratic oath, decide to help a victim.

Law is always a funny business, especially when we wear our common sense glasses and try to evaluate situations.

[amyth78]

Originally Posted by GKR9900

Now, the cyclist's family is taking the matter to court.

Sad that a good Samaritan is being harassed for his good deed in helping an accident victim.

Before getting worried with a mere threat of taking the matter to court, let's evaluate what all possible legal action can be taken by the cyclist against Dr. X.

Option - 1: The Cyclist may file an F.I.R. against Dr. X under Section 337 / 338 of I.P.C. - As Dr. X already informed the Police, I do not see Police will take any action on the basis of the F.I.R. However, as Dr. X informed the Police about the incident verbally, it is advisable that he should submit written information (GD entry) with the jurisdictional police station stating the entire facts including subsequent legal action threats from Cyclist. In a worst case scenario, if Police take any action on the basis of the Cyclist's FIR, then both the above referred sections are bailable and there is no evidence available to Cyclist or Police to establish a case against Dr. X.

Option - 2: Filing FIR through Court under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. - In case Police refuse to entertain Cyclist's FIR, then he may approach the Court under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for lodging of FIR. In this scenario, the Court will first evaluate the available evidences on record before issuing such direction to the Police and I feel cyclist does not have any substantial evidence to establish his case against Dr. X. In the worst case scenario, the Court may direct Police to lodge an FIR against an unidentified person / vehicle and investigate the case. This option does require engaging a counsel, legal costs and court appearances by the Cyclist.

Option -3: Approaching Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT): The cyclist may approach MACT claiming compensation for the injury caused to him due to the accident. This is a civil procedure and the case will be filed against Dr. X and the insurance company with whom the car is insured. In this proceeding also the Cyclist need to establish his case with sufficient evidence to prove that the accident caused by Dr. X's car. Further, it will be the insurance company who will strongly defend and fight the case as final liability to pay compensation will always lie on the insurance company. Hence, Dr. X need not be much worried about this proceeding. I somehow feel that cyclist is planning to approach MACT as there are people available in legal domain who handles such matters on commission / sharing basis. The cyclist must have discussed the incident with any of such people and they must have advised the cyclist to initiate a claim before MACT so that all can extract some money from Dr. X.

From my limited legal knowledge, I can evaluate only above three options available to the cyclist and the course of action in such situations. In any case, please advise Dr. X not to be worried about the incident and keep a good lawyer handy so that as and when the situation arises, he can take advice and assistance from the lawyer.

Dr. X is a good human being and this incident should not be a deterrent for him to help any accident victim in the future.

[GKR9900]

Originally Posted by aqualeo2040

What evidence does the cyclist have to prove that Dr X crashed into his bike?

Is there any CCTV footage present?

If it's just about eyewitness account, then the cyclist friend cannot bear witness as he is related to the victim and hence can be biased.

Unfortunately, no CCTV footage about the incident is available.

Originally Posted by aqualeo2040

Going a step back, is there any proof that the accident happened the way it has been described? If there's no CCTV, no neutral eyewitness and no auto-driver, then the cyclist might have as well had a fall by himself and Dr X the good person that he is to his Hippocratic oath, decide to help a victim.

Law is always a funny business, especially when we wear our common sense glasses and try to evaluate situations.

The only apparent ones are the damage to the car, the witnesses who were present at the spot (can't ensure their neutrality though) and his wife ( I presume her statement wouldn't be held valid because of the apparent bias).

Originally Posted by amyth78

From my limited legal knowledge, I can evaluate only above three options available to the cyclist and the course of action in such situations. In any case, please advise Dr. X not to be worried about the incident and keep a good lawyer handy so that as and when the situation arises, he can take advice and assistance from the lawyer.

Thank you for explaining the prospective options in detail amyth78. Have already advised him to take a legal opinion.

Originally Posted by amyth78

Dr. X is a good human being and this incident should not be a deterrent for him to help any accident victim in the future.

Will surely pass on the message to my friend.

[texens]

After reading through all these posts narrating how folks have been taken for a ride by the policemen, I feel I had a much better experience.

A couple months back, while driving near the Baraula T point, a cabbie (of India TV) hit my car from the passenger side. Why/How? - He was talking on his mobile phone ! Since we were at the mouth of the T point, both the cars were doing about 10 Kmph.

I was driving with my colleague and we were super pissed because this guy was talking on his phone while driving. Without a second thought, I dialed 100 and told them that there had been a car accident and the driver had hit us while talking on his mobile phone. She took down the precise location and asked us to wait.
My colleague in the meanwhile was yelling at the cabbie. The cabbie was adamant that he wasn't talking on the phone. We asked him to show his call records, he realized that he was caught red handed and gave in and accepted his mistake.
After about 10-15 minutes, I see a police bolero arrive. We narrated the whole incident to the cops. We told him specifically that the cabbie was talking on his phone when he hit us. He advised us to settle it out of court to make life easier for both of us. Both the parties agreed and policeman asked cabbie to pay for the repairs towards our car.

The cabbie was being an a** this entire time, wasn't talking properly even to the cops. He even took out his bidi and lit it up in front of the cops !
The cabbie said that he has asked his uncle to come and and will settle once he is here. The cops told us that we don't want to leave you guys here with him, as he might call in *gundas* from his village and create trouble. They took us both with our cars to the station. We were following them, and by the time we parked our car and reached inside the station, they had already thrown the cabbie in this special room (supposedly the cell).

Cabbie's boss arrived within 10 minutes of him landing in the cell ! The policeman took both the parties to the auto workshop next to the police station and asked for an estimate. The cabbie's boss apologized to us and paid up the estimated amount without asking a second time. It looked like this wasn't the first time one of his cabbie had hit another car. The policeman, before leaving us asked if we were satisfied. He then went on to verbally ask us in a formal tone if we would like to register an legal case against the cabbie. We said "No".

We thanked the policeman and, finally about 2.5 hours after this incident, we went back to our office. In retrospection, I believe the time and effort that we ended up spending wasn't worth the money.

I was pretty happy with my entire interaction with the police folks. They were very mature and helpful throughout the episode.