Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules No Insurance for Legal Heirs in Rash Driving Fatalities

According to a decision by the Supreme Court, the legal heirs can not demand insurance in case of death caused by rash driving of the deceased. This choice solidifies individual responsibility, blocks the possibility of generating revenue out of a wrong as well as encourages responsible driving, which affects the insurance policy holders and the scrutiny of insurance claims, as well.

Supreme Court

Supreme Court: No Compensation for Legal Heirs if Driver Dies Due to Own Negligence

In G Nagarathna Vs. G Manjunatha, the Supreme Court held that legal heirs of a driver who died as a result of his own rash and negligent driving could not claim compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Court confirmed orders of the Tribunal and Karnataka High Court, placing reliance upon precedents which rule out the possibility of one deriving benefit from one’s own wrong. The ruling makes it clear that insurance firms are not responsible in such situations and supports fundamental tort law and public policy tenets.

CRIMINAL LAW

Can Legal Heirs Continue Criminal Proceedings After the Complainant’s Death?

This discussion explores whether legal successors can pursue criminal cases after the death of a complainant according to Indian law, with reference to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Criminal cases are generally personal and die with death, but exceptions are made in certain offences like defamation under Section 222 where successors can carry on if authorized by law. Based on judicial precedents and BNSS provisions, this research assesses the scope, limitations, and procedural intricacies, providing insight into the convergence of succession and criminal justice in India’s contemporary legal landscape.