Reena Vs Managing Director (Supreme Court of India)
SC Enhances Motor Accident Compensation to ₹50.82 Lakh: Criminal Acquittal Does Not Negate Civil Negligence; Charge Sheet Is Prima Facie Evidence
In Reena v. Managing Director, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation & Ors. [2026 INSC 889], the Supreme Court dealt with compensation arising from a 2005 road accident between a Santro car and a KSRTC bus, in which the claimant lost her husband, mother-in-law and a family friend and herself suffered injuries.
The MACT had held the KSRTC bus driver solely responsible for the accident. The Karnataka High Court, however, attributed 50% contributory negligence to the deceased husband, principally relying upon the accident sketch and the subsequent acquittal of the bus driver in the criminal case. Consequently, although it computed compensation for the husband’s death at ₹14.35 lakh, it reduced the amount payable to ₹7.17 lakh.
The Supreme Court found the High Court’s approach erroneous. It laid down/reiterated important principles governing motor accident claims:
Police records such as the FIR and final charge sheet constitute valid and reliable prima facie evidence of rash and negligent driving in MACT proceedings. A subsequent acquittal in a criminal case does not wipe out civil liability, because criminal culpability requires a substantially higher standard of proof than negligence under tort law. MACT proceedings are decided on the preponderance of probabilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
