there are no eye witnesses to the case 

no cctv footage or any evidence 

we cannot say whether you would be acquitted but you have a good case on merits 

Without eye witnesses and only police and inspector statements, there's a chance for acquittal if negligence isn't proven. If evidence shows recklessness or negligence, punishment is possible.

merely on the basis of complainant and other material court can convict you.

Need to steady charge sheet to advise precisely. 

 It is not known that what has been narrated by the witnesses and what has been stated in the charge sheet.

However, in a criminal accident case, the absence of eyewitnesses does not automatically lead to acquittal, but it can make it more challenging for the prosecution to prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The prosecution may rely on other types of evidence, such as medical records, vehicle damage, or circumstantial evidence, to establish the accused's culpability. If the prosecution fails to meet the burden of proof, the accused may be acquitted. 

Yes mostly If good cross is conducted by your advocate you can get acquittal 

- Section 304 of the IPC deals with punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It outlines the penalties for causing death when there is no intention to kill or cause bodily injury likely to cause death, or when there is such intention but with mitigating circumstances.

- Since, there is no eye witness in the said case and other witnesses disclosed that they have not seen the said incident and came to know from the police official , then the statement of police official will have no impact on the case. 

- In the matter of George versus State of Tamil Nadu , the Supreme Court acquitted several accused based on an inconsistent eyewitness whose account of the crime differed on key facts .

- You deserve for acquittal in the case. 

Dear Sir,

You have not mentioned the statement of the victim, that also matters. Try to get the favourable statement by IO and motor veh inspector through your cross examination. Your chances of acquital will be increased.  

Dear Client,

The instant concern is regarding whether there is a possibility to obtain an acquittal in a case registered u/s 304A of the IPC of causing death by rash and negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide.

It is noteworthy that there are no eye witnesses, and thus it can be concluded that the witnesses who have been examined so far have only stated whatever they came to know from the police. The motor vehicle inspector and the investigating officer are the only entities remaining to be examined, and the court proceedings are in its later stages. In criminal proceedings including the present one, direct evidences such as eye witnesses or CCTV are so imperative that without them, it is very difficult for the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, thereby cause a conviction.

Since there are no eye witnesses, the prosecution has the onus to examine the vehicle for any mechanical defects or some other proof to establish the element of negligence. The prosecution has burden to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt that you were driving rashly or negligently, and that such negligence or rashness has resulted in a person’s death. Unless the prosecution is able to do so conclusively, an acquittal is a very likely outcome.  

Legal principle: Section 304 IPC. Refer the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Alamgir Vs. State of NCT of Delhi (2003), wherein the court set aside the case u/s 304A IPC, on the grounds of lack of direct proof.

I hope this answer helps. In case of future queries, please feel free to contact us. Thank you.

You were involved in a road accident in 2020 where your car hit a lady, leading to registration of a case under Section 304A IPC. The case has now reached an advanced stage of trial, and only the Motor Vehicle Inspector (MVI) and the Investigating Officer (IO) are left to depose. So far, all prosecution witnesses have clearly stated that they are not eyewitnesses and that they only came to know about the incident through the police.

Since there are no direct eyewitnesses and no witness has confirmed seeing you driving rashly or negligently, the prosecution’s case lacks the foundational requirement of proving rash or negligent conduct on your part. Section 304A requires the prosecution to establish, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused caused the death through a rash or negligent act. Mere involvement in the accident does not amount to criminal liability unless the prosecution proves the essential ingredients of rashness or negligence and a direct link between your act and the victim’s death.

Unless the MVI or IO produce compelling evidence, such as CCTV footage, mechanical failure due to your neglect, overspeeding, or skid marks, the court is unlikely to convict you based on assumptions or hearsay. The statements of the remaining two witnesses will be procedural and technical in nature. If the MVI confirms that your vehicle had no mechanical fault and the IO does not offer any credible evidence of rash driving, your lawyer can move for acquittal under Section 248(1) CrPC once the prosecution evidence is closed.

In the absence of direct evidence or reliable expert findings proving your negligence, the court may conclude that the prosecution failed to establish your guilt. If you maintain a consistent stand and the evidence on record remains weak, the case will likely result in an acquittal.

If needed, I can help you prepare written submissions or case law references to support the argument for acquittal at the final stage.

In case you need my assistance in the matter I can be contacted on 

Regards,

YUGANSHU SHARMA

SYS LAW OFFICES