https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793623 Moving a bus after passengers had alighted, on the conductor's signal, did not amount to rash or negligent driving under Sections 279 and 304A IPC on these facts. The conductor's evidence showed the bus was stationary, passengers got down, and the driver moved only after receiving instructions. The Court found no basis to infer criminal negligence merely because the deceased fell while descending from the bus, and held that the ingredients of the charged offences were not satisfied. The conviction and sentence were therefore unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to acquittal. en-us Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:04:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793623 Moving a bus after passengers had alighted, on the conductor's signal, did not amount to rash or negligent driving under Sections 279 and 304A IPC on these facts. The conductor's evidence showed the bus was stationary, passengers got down, and the driver moved only after receiving instructions. The Court found no basis to infer criminal negligence merely because the deceased fell while descending from the bus, and held that the ingredients of the charged offences were not satisfied. The conviction and sentence were therefore unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to acquittal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 27 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793623