[kaushik_s]

Many of the people who are feeling being neglected/cheated by the judiciary system is because they are probably worried about the consequences if the same happen to them. As they are the person behind the wheel most of the time. But think it the other way, may be you are the pedestrian, crossing the road to get a ice-cream or something, or may be it's your kid or some near and dear one, God forbid, who got hit by a car/vehicle. What would be your reaction at that moment? Still the pedestrian only be at fault or could've been the driver be little more careful? Driving a car and paying taxes doesn't mean that one can own the road and has all the rights to use the road.

[akj53]

So by the same logic, if a man is walking between the rails and a train hits him, railways are at fault and should pay the compensation.

By the way such issues will not arise if all vehicles on road operate at the speed of our judicial system - 23 years to deliver a judgement in a simple case like this. Half the people die while fighting the court cases and without getting justice. Who compensates them???

[rohan_iitr]

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

Many of the people who are feeling being neglected/cheated by the judiciary system is because they are probably worried about the consequences if the same happen to them. As they are the person behind the wheel most of the time.

Motorists are feeling cheated because in such cases the public sympathy always goes to the pedestrian, who generally is the poorer of the two, and also suffers greater injuries.

Also, a car's trajectory is more or less predictable. It is relatively easier for a pedestrian to watch the oncoming vehicle and decide whether it is safe to cross the road. But, many pedestrians cross the roads in such unexpected and dangerous manners that would scare the living daylights out of even experienced drivers.

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

But think it the other way, may be you are the pedestrian, crossing the road to get a ice-cream or something, or may be it's your kid or some near and dear one, God forbid, who got hit by a car/vehicle. What would be your reaction at that moment? Still the pedestrian only be at fault or could've been the driver be little more careful? Driving a car and paying taxes doesn't mean that one can own the road and has all the rights to use the road.

It is the responsibility of parents to teach their kids the proper way to cross the road. Being a kid is not an excuse. If a kid is too young to understand road manners, he should not be left unsupervised on a road. Period.

Motorists should not be held responsible for kids who can't make out the difference between a playground and a busy road.

Rohan,
Bangalore

[Raccoon]

I see one rising trend on Pune roads - people just raising their hands to signal to oncoming traffic to stop and then giving two hoots to any oncoming traffic and just jumping on the road. This tactic seems mostly prevalent amongst elderly people and ladies. Now how do they assume that a driver will be able to screech to a halt just before coming close enough to mow them down?

As for the issue about kids mentioned above, I stay in an area where there are a few schools. Every day I see small kids throwing all sense and caution to the winds. Have seen a few accidents too... including a few friends getting involved in them, apparently with no fault of theirs. It is very clear that majority of parents have failed to teach their school going kids even very basic road discipline and caution. And yet, public opinion always goes on the side of the kid/pedestrian.

Its a really sad scenario on our roads. :(

[KishoreC]

A serious discussion going on here.
Most of the comments and counter comments made here are individually true, but individuals cannot survive individually. They tend to always mix and match, mingle and collide with each other, so I guess we need a collective approach.

I guess it's a matter of synchronization on the roads. We simply don't know how to live and let live. It's more of a "Live and Kill All" approach, or may be "I don't care if I live but you need to die" approach.

Most of the roads (mainly city roads) are clearly divided in parts, for different kind of road users. Pedestrians need to stick to sidewalks and vehicles need to stick to the road. But this practical sense is not at all observed on the roads. In Bangalore I see more bikes on the pavements than pedestrians. Also, I see most of the pedestrians walking on the road while having a well-laid pavement available for them, even side rails don;t stop them from walking on the packed roads.

Who will you blame then ? No one and everyone and the same time.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

Motorists are feeling cheated because in such cases the public sympathy always goes to the pedestrian, who generally is the poorer of the two, and also suffers greater injuries.

BTW, a person walking on the road may not be the poorer person than the one driving. What about a person say going for morning walk being hit by a cabby? So can we please stop this poor vs. rich talks?

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

Also, a car's trajectory is more or less predictable. It is relatively easier for a pedestrian to watch the oncoming vehicle and decide whether it is safe to cross the road. But, many pedestrians cross the roads in such unexpected and dangerous manners that would scare the living daylights out of even experienced drivers.

As someone said, with greater power comes greater responsibilities. Being extra cautious may just save another life. Life is precious, be it of a pedestrian or of a driver. Loosing a minute or two by not trying 0-100kmph on a red may save more.

Originally Posted by rohan_iitr

It is the responsibility of parents to teach their kids the proper way to cross the road. Being a kid is not an excuse. If a kid is too young to understand road manners, he should not be left unsupervised on a road. Period.

Motorists should not be held responsible for kids who can't make out the difference between a playground and a busy road.

Rohan,
Bangalore

Kids will be kids, we all know that, we ourselves have been kids and we still probably can remember how we acted then. And now we all have matured to a certain level to understand what's right and what's wrong. So is it us or the kids who has to be more responsible? If someone speeds near a school and hits a kid I don't have any sympathy for that person. He hasn't yet matured with his age. Period.

Originally Posted by Raccoon

I see one rising trend on Pune roads - people just raising their hands to signal to oncoming traffic to stop and then giving two hoots to any oncoming traffic and just jumping on the road. This tactic seems mostly prevalent amongst elderly people and ladies. Now how do they assume that a driver will be able to screech to a halt just before coming close enough to mow them down?

In older days when people have more patience and respect for a fellow human being, they used to stop or slow down when one sees an elderly person crossing the road. The poor elderly person probably still expects the same but the world has changed radically and no-one even care to stop for anyone.

Originally Posted by Raccoon

As for the issue about kids mentioned above, I stay in an area where there are a few schools. Every day I see small kids throwing all sense and caution to the winds. Have seen a few accidents too... including a few friends getting involved in them, apparently with no fault of theirs. It is very clear that majority of parents have failed to teach their school going kids even very basic road discipline and caution. And yet, public opinion always goes on the side of the kid/pedestrian.

Its a really sad scenario on our roads. :(

BTW, my post was not just about kids but about other near and dear one's too. Let me be more specific now. May be it's your father/mother/sister/brother/GF or anyone close who got hit by a speeding car. May be it was part negligence by the person who got hit and part negligence by the driver. But would you still then make the same comment that the driver was being made a scapegoat for killing your girlfriend for her negligence? Sorry that my words are very harsh and I pray nothing such happens to anyone out here but sometimes hard words may bring the point home.

[prince_pervez]

Most of the pedestrians are in their own world thinking about something or the other and in the same mood make some surprising decisions on the road.
They always assume that the vehicle will brake no matter what.
On the other hand there is so much traffic everywhere that crossing has become a mission. Just try to cross the road between Christ college and Concord motors.
If you can do that 'easily' you are my hero. Thankfully there are home guards appointed who look after the crossing of pedestrians.
So it a mix of everything. Neglegence, hurry, assumptions and a lot more.
Even if we lack infrastructure, a major percentage of pedestrain casualties can be handled with proper education.
Yesterday, I was riding on my bike and an old lady carry massive amounts of load on her head suddenly decides to dart across the road w/o looking. I reduce speed and honk to stop her. But she continues, very confident that I would stop.
Ironically I check the rear view to find absolutely no one, I repeat no one, behind me.
So she could have easily completed the crossing manuver after I crossed her.
This is the mentality that I am talking about. I can be changed, but it has to start from a very tender age.
When I cross I always try to let motorists pass, and after I am convinced that I'd be safe, then only I take that first step. Crossing w/o looking is inviting trouble.

That brings to another very important question. If this law is implemented across India, would I stop even when I know I am not at fault ?
I really have to think. If I think in humanitarian terms, well many people are going to be inhuman once I hit someone with no fault of mine.

[akj53]

Nobody should be above the law so there should be strict laws for pedestrians also and if they do not behave or follow the law, they should also face the consequences. Why should insurance companies pay a third party claim to any guilty party only because he is a pedestrian or driving a smaller vehicle.

Very often pedestrians break the steel fencing put on road dividers to cross the roads. Do they have the right to do that?? And also they tilt the broken fencing to one side of the road where it becomes a menace for the oncoming vehicles on that side of the road.
Who compensates the vehicle owner if he meets an accident due to the broken and tilted fencing.

Indian laws need drastic changes with the basic rule - Guilty will be punished no matter who so ever he is.

[amitoj]

Originally Posted by prince_pervez

Yesterday, I was riding on my bike and an old lady carry massive amounts of load on her head suddenly decides to dart across the road w/o looking. I reduce speed and honk to stop her. But she continues, very confident that I would stop.
Ironically I check the rear view to find absolutely no one, I repeat no one, behind me.

Hehe. She must have had super human strength to have a massive load on her head and yet be able to run across the road! No wonder you expected her to constantly move her head left and right under that heavy load of hers to check for traffic.

Lookit, i am not saying all pedestrians are saints. We all have had a few instances of some spaced out dude in his own world trying to cross the road as if its a walk in the park. That does not mean everyone is that way. Have you never crossed a road? I bet you were careful about the traffic. I bet almost 99% of people here are careful when crossing roads. There are many more out there like us. We dont see them because we zip by them while they wait for the right opportunity to cross the road. Its this general attitude that all pedestrians are crazy whackos out to get themselves killed that i am not able to digest.

[prince_pervez]

Originally Posted by amitoj

Lookit, i am not saying all pedestrians are saints.

I was not referencing to any specific post.

I bet almost 99% of people here are careful when crossing roads.

I think I'll have to disagree here. 60% is a good figure.

We dont see them because we zip by them while they wait for the right opportunity to cross the road.

Its this general attitude that all pedestrians are crazy whackos out to get themselves killed that i am not able to digest.

No way. Not all are crazy whackos. But some are. And once they start crossing they way they do, they educate/inspire others with their heroics and within a short period there are screeches, irate foul mouthed individuals and a lot of people on the road.

[jaysmokesleaves]

I feel this is a bunch of Royal Horse Crap.

There always is a humane angle in any accident case. But no such angle from the point of view of the car driver. He is not human because he is in a car. If you walk on the road, cycle on the road, run across the road, jaywalk on the road, sleep on the road, s.h.i.t. on the road, sit on the road, play on the road, live on the road, our constitution declares you human with the subsequent right for compensation. Any person driving a car on the road is liable to pay such damages because a person in a car is not an equal human.

So basically, according to all the laws of our constitution if our fault that we use the road to drive. We should all jaywalk. Its allowed in our constitution and you also get legally compensated for any unfortunate event.

[prince_pervez]

Originally Posted by jaysmokesleaves

I feel this is a bunch of Royal Horse Crap.

It is.

So basically, according to all the laws of our constitution if our fault that we use the road to drive. We should all jaywalk.

If you walk on the road, cycle on the road, run across the road, jaywalk on the road, sleep on the road, s.h.i.t. on the road, sit on the road, play on the road, live on the road, our constitution declares you human with the subsequent right for compensation. Any person driving a car on the road is liable to pay such damages because a person in a car is not an equal human.

I'm surprised that this topic has not been debated across T.V. channels.
Has anyone appealed to this ?

[amitoj]

Now thats crap of elephantine proportions if i ever saw one!

What this thread has shown me is how prevalent PEBKAC is, even in the educated world.

Please do continue with your hue and cry over grave injustice done to the motoring world by this case.

Am outta here.

Peace.

[Gansan]

Guys, I find this thread degenerating in to a rant. It is not as if a blanket judgment has been given. As for "what if" conjunctures, there can be a zillion of them. And I find a few posts relating to "irresponsibility" of kids downright childish. Remember, kids will be kids and it is our duty to safeguard them even if they are 110% in the wrong. I remember a couple of sign boards I used to read near a school at Tuticorin - one had pictures of small kids praying and read "God bless the careful drivers who watch out for us", and the other one read "Please watch out for the little ones on the road, it could be one of yours".

Pedestrians come from all walks of life and many of them could be uneducated. Ditto for other drivers on the road. Come to think of it, except owner-drivers of cars, all other four wheeler drivers could only be semi-literates at best. Most two wheeler riders must be well educated, but ride as if they are not. It is best that we drive in a defensive manner inside city limits.

As for "haves" Vs "have nots" view, so long as the latter outnumber the former, some amount of skewing in their favour, at all levels, will be present.

[anainar]

I think we all are going overboard. The judgment is clear that the driver could have avoided the accident. So, the judges had access to information which we dont have and that has made them to think the driver did not make an effort to avoid the accident. It could be by way of braking, and still the car did not stop in time. All this could have been evidences to prove the driver made an effort to avoid.

Anyway, jaywalking in a highway should be a punishable offence. Tracks are for trains and if some one is hit by a train, the driver is not held accountable. This may hold good for Highways which are supposed to be the territory of motor vehicles, but near schools, urban roads have to be shared and I dont think if speed limits are followed and driven defensively, a motor car/bike cannot stop if the driver wants to or alert enough. Defensive Driving is the key.


Nainar