Source: Supreme Court 

Why in News? 

Recently, the Supreme Court in the matter of Sajeena Ikhbal & Ors. V. Mini Babu George & Ors. has held that while determining accidental claims the principle of preponderance of probability must be applied and not the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt. 

What was the Background of the Sajeena Ikhbal & Ors. V. Mini Babu George & Ors Case?  

• The case involves a fatal motor vehicle accident that occurred on 10th June 2023. 
• The deceased, Ikhbal, was riding a motorcycle from Thodupuzha to Muttom when the accident took place.  
• The appellants (Ikhbal's widow, minor child, and parents) claim that a car driven by respondent no. 2 came from the opposite direction and hit Ikhbal's motorcycle. 
• As a result of the collision, Ikhbal fell and sustained fatal injuries. He was taken to the hospital but succumbed to his injuries. 
• At the time of his death, Ikhbal was employed as a U.D. Clerk in the Registration Department with a monthly income of Rs. 21,456/-. 
• The appellants filed a claim petition against the owner (respondent no. 1), driver (respondent no. 2), and insurer (respondent no. 3) of the car allegedly involved in the accident. 
• Respondent nos. 2 and 3 denied the involvement of their car in the accident, claiming that Ikhbal's motorcycle hit the parked bus while attempting to overtake it. 
• The respondents contend that respondent no. 2 arrived at the scene after the accident and helped transport Ikhbal to the hospital. 
• The case primarily revolves around determining whether the car was indeed involved in the accident and if the driver was negligent. 
• Both parties presented witnesses and documentary evidence to support their respective claims before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT). 
• It is argued that the MACT and the High Court as well have recorded the findings adverse to the appellants basing on conjectures and surmises and by complete misreading the evidence. 
• Aggrieved the appellant filed the present appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India (COI) before the Supreme Court.

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal:

• It deals with all the claims related to loss of life/property and injury cases resulting from Motor Accidents. 
• The claims are to be filed directly before the tribunal. 
• The courts under MACT are presided by judicial officers from the district Judicial Service. 
• The claims to be filed in a prescribed format. 
• The contents and documents required for filing are also to be complied with while filing before MACT.

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court made the following observations: 
  • That there was ample evidence demonstrating the involvement of the car in the accident, contrary to the lower courts' findings. 
  • That the lower courts' findings were based on conjectures and misreading of evidence. 
  • That the damage to the car, as recorded in the Mahazar (inspection report), clearly indicated its involvement in the accident. 
• The Supreme Court criticized the lower courts for disbelieving the eyewitness solely because the police had not recorded his statement during the investigation. 
• It emphasized that in motor accident cases, the principle of preponderance of probability should be applied, not the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt. 
• The Supreme Court found the car driver's admission that the bus was 100 feet away when the motorcycle hit the car to be significant. 
  • The Court noted the importance of considering all evidence, including the testimony of the bus driver and the teashop owner. 
  • It highlighted that the Mahazar clearly recorded damages to the front side of the car, making it impossible to conclude that the car was not involved in the accident. 
• The Supreme Court determined that the lower courts had failed to consider the evidence in its true perspective, resulting in a perverse finding regarding the non-involvement of the car. 
• Based on the above observations the Supreme Court concluded that the evidence, when properly assessed, could only lead to the conclusion that the car was involved in the accident that caused Ikhbal's death. 

What is the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988? 

About: 

• Replacing the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, this Act came into force on 1st July 1989. 
• The Act provides in detail the legislative provisions regarding licensing of drivers/conductors, registration of motor vehicles, control of motor vehicles through permits, special provisions relating to state transport undertakings, traffic regulation, insurance, liability, offences and penalties, etc. 

Objectives: 

• Road safety. 
• Efficient transportation. 
• Protection of the rights of road users. 
• The Act provides a comprehensive framework for traffic regulations, vehicle standards, licensing, and penalties for violations.

What is Preponderance of Probability? 

About: 

• It is basically determining which fact or evidence is more likely to happen. 
• This concept does not involve elimination of all doubts rather it weighs the two presented facts based on which has greater likelihood. 
•  It is contrasting to the principle of proving beyond reasonable doubt. 
• In civil cases the party having burden of proof has to show that their side of story is more plausible than the other side. 

Key Elements of Preponderance of Probability: 

• The fact of one side must be proved that it is more likely to occur than the other side. 
• The evidence having greater credibility or weigh shall be determined by the court to conclude the case. 
• Such principle can be applicable in the disputes related to contracts, torts, where the burden of proof lies on the claimant. 
• The balance should be made by the court between the seriousness of case to the evidence presented. Standard of evidence varies with the gravity of the Issue. 

Difference Between Principle of Preponderance of Probability & Proving Beyond Reasonable Doubt: