[for_cars1]

Originally Posted by jigar1791@gmail

Looks like the biker is at fault here, though, the truck seems to be overspeeding.

....

There is no abiguity on who is at fault here, the biker is 100% at fault (crossing without even looking at oncoming traffic).

The truck driver faced the brunt as he was not driving defensively (overspeeding). One has to anticipate and account for other people's mistakes on our roads as much as possible and keep a fair margin of error. There is no room for ego or proving who is right or wrong, all involved parties can suffer the consequences.

There is no way that heavy truck (especially if loaded) could have stopped if needed such a short distance at that speed.

Sadly the truck driver chose to ignore the possibility that a biker, pedestrian or stray animal frequently cross our roads without any indication or warning on our roads, he was too fast and simply rash and paid the price.

[Small Bot]

Originally Posted by akshaylad

The locals suspected that the driver was under the influence of alcohol and demanded the driver be subjected to alcometer test and that he should be placed under arrest and his license be suspended.

Originally Posted by AutoNoob

And there goes the charge of DUI, unless alcometer test/ blood sample was taken immediately after the accident.

Unfortunately, the law in most states in India does not mandate taking blood samples or conducting drug/alcohol tests immediately after the accident.

Correct me if I'm mistaken - if the DUI charge does not stick due to paucity of evidence gathered in time, will it not turn into Involuntary Manslaughter here?

I don't know nearly enough about the law, so I would like to know what happens next. I wonder if cases like these get taken up and tried in criminal courts. And if the offender is allowed to push for a negotiated settlement with the deceased folks' family members, or if the court takes a stricter view of these and directly decides on a punishment (jail term+fine probably) commensurate to the offence.

Originally Posted by for_cars1

There is no ambiguity on who is at fault here, the biker is 100% at fault (crossing without even looking at oncoming traffic).

Talking logically about the cause of the incident, it is the biker who caused this without any doubt. But you just know that the lorry driver is going to face way more troubles than the biker anyway - from the police, from his employers, from the insurance company, etc.

Whereas, it's just another day in the life of the biker. He'll get a rap on the knuckles once and then happily go on to cause an accident elsewhere some other day.

[Acharya]

Is it really the Biker who is at fault here or our RTOs which distribute licenses like freebies?
High probability that bike rider has no formal information and education on how to ride motorcycle on highway (or in cities), despite having a valid license.

When a country doesn't cultivate and train majority of population in basic traffic sense and there are no tollgates to check if prospective driver has learned most basic skills, the human psychology of following the Path of Least Resistance takes over common sense (& traffic sense, if there is any).

There is an unwritten understanding and hope against hope that riders and drivers miraculously develop a sense of traffic, based on observations and self-interest, since they have a license.

Unless, we adopt a structural improvement on educating drivers prior to doling out license, such travesty of life and vehicles will continue on our roads.

Sadly, Road and transport ministry gave up on this matter, after an sincere attempt of increasing fines went kaput, as most state govts ended up overruling it.

[binand]

Originally Posted by Acharya

Is it really the Biker who is at fault here...

Yes.

Originally Posted by Acharya

... or our RTOs which distribute licenses like freebies?

No.

The RTO who licensed the bike rider in the video (say, TS-01) can be held at fault if a statistically significant percentage of the riders licensed by this RTO end up causing accidents, AND this percentage is statistically higher for this RTO than other comparable RTOs.

[DevD]

Originally Posted by jigar1791@gmail

Saw this video on my YT feed -
https://www.Youtube.com/watch?v=yD3Syv7IpgM

Looks like the biker is at fault here, though, the truck seems to be overspeeding.

AND, the biker..?

100% fault lies with Truck driver for speeding well over the speed limit. There are enough markings on road including rumble strips indicating an upcoming crossing on highway. Typically the speed limit is reduced to 30 kmph in these stretches. If the truck would have slowed down to the speed limit, he could have managed to avoid the accident.

Bigger vehicle drivers should expect such random crossing by smaller vehicles, slow moving tractors, people crossing highway at such stretches with white rumble strips that increases as it approaches the junction.

[abhishekjoshi84]

A mild accident. Wanted to post here to know what you all think about this one. Lot of comments on Twitter about whether or not car driver was at fault here.



https://twitter.com/chiragbarjatyaa/...7RP7eTJww&s=09

[binand]

Originally Posted by abhishekjoshi84

Lot of comments on Twitter about whether or not car driver was at fault here.

If I were driving that car, I'd have stopped and waved to all those kids to move along. It is clear they were looking for ways to avoid the rainwater puddle.

(I don't think I'd be able to live with myself if a vehicle I were driving hurt a child irrespective of who's to blame. This actually fetches me a lot of angry horn blasts here in Bangalore).

[epiccross]

Originally Posted by abhishekjoshi84

A mild accident. Wanted to post here to know what you all think about this one. Lot of comments on Twitter about whether or not car driver was at fault here.

I wouldn't say driver was at "fault" in a strict sense, but he could have been a tad more careful. I generally keep move a bit more towards the right whenever possible if there are pedestrians, especially kids. They're super distracted or, well, they are kids, so gives you a bit more margin to work with.

I mean it's easy to judge anyone when it's a matter of split seconds, so I won't do that.

PS: More importantly, who left these kids alone unsupervised? Most if not all of the blame should go to them. They're little kids, this or worse is always bound to happen.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by abhishekjoshi84

Lot of comments on Twitter about whether or not car driver was at fault here.

When an accident involves kids, there is no question of who is wrong. The driver should always be extra careful till he safely passes that bunch of kids. Kids will always be kids. Better be safe than sorry.

[Bhokal]

With so many small kids so close on the road, we should always be extra careful. Moreover, that kid's view was hindered because of the raincoat. The driver should have noticed it and anticipate something like that.

[NomadSK]

Originally Posted by abhishekjoshi84

A mild accident. Wanted to post here to know what you all think about this one.

Hope the kid wasn’t injured severely.

In any country where traffic/driving rules are well defined, the fault is Driver’s. He should have stopped and let the eye contact with the kids on the road or could have honked and made his presence noticed, before proceeding ahead, specially when there is no dedicated pavement for them to walk on. Kids are forever-excited about everything even if it is about crossing the road, playing on the roads, jumping in the puddle of the water. Instinctively, they run on or across roads.

While driving in township, if I see kids even on the side walkway standing and not looking towards me, a micro second honk makes them aware of me and then I proceed with dead slow speed.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by Gansan

When an accident involves kids, there is no question of who is wrong. The driver should always be extra careful till he safely passes that bunch of kids. Kids will always be kids. Better be safe than sorry.

I can relate to this. At a really narrow Y fork (where I need to take the right) I had stopped my car to allow for a pickup to to exit out of right fork. After the pick exited, I was about to get going when a kid jumped on to the road and ran across because some one called him from the other side of the street. Thankfully nothing happened but this was one of the most scary experiences as a driver. I saw the person calling some one across the street and caught the kid jumping on to the road through my peripheral vision. What saved the day was, situational awareness, defensive driving and most importantly loads of luck ---The kid was invisible in front of my Nexon EV's bonnet and if I had not caught him in corner of my eye, things could have turned ugly.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Acharya

Is it really the Biker who is at fault here or our RTOs which distribute licenses like freebies? ... ... ...

At the society level, yes. But at the individual level, each is responsible for their own vehicle and accidents: they are even responsible for their own ignorance.

(Make that "we." Always useful, when pointing the finger, to point it back at ourselves too)

Originally Posted by Gansan

When an accident involves kids, there is no question of who is wrong. The driver should always be extra careful till he safely passes that bunch of kids. Kids will always be kids. Better be safe than sorry.

There are other factors too, like the parents, but still absolutely yes. Any pedestrian should be passed with care. With children there is the added danger that, even if they have noticed our vehicle, something else may take their attention in a moment. So I always treat children as not knowing I'm there, even if they are staring straight at me!

[Small Bot]

Originally Posted by abhishekjoshi84

A mild accident. Wanted to post here to know what you all think about this one. Lot of comments on Twitter about whether or not car driver was at fault here.

I'd take a more black-and-white approach to this, also considering that there was no real pavement and the pedestrians were forced to walk on the road

If a car on the road hits a pedestrian, it's the car driver's fault. All the being careful and honking and waiting for the children to move etc. should have been done before the hit. I think that's how the law and law enforcement would look at it too.

The moment the child was hit by the car, it becomes the car driver's fault. Even with the dashcam footage.

Unfortunate and sometimes even unfair, but that's the law where we live in.

That said, I think the video showed the child getting up and scampering away, so I hope it was nothing more than a scare and no real injury.

[harry10]

Originally Posted by abhishekjoshi84

A mild accident. Wanted to post here to know what you all think about this one. Lot of comments on Twitter about whether or not car driver was at fault here.

https://twitter.com/chiragbarjatyaa/...7RP7eTJww&s=09

As a thumb rule I honk when I am next to pedestrians, crossing a larger vehicle, on an intersection even if it looks empty. If near kids or elderly I honk twice cos their attention span isn't the greatest.

I hope car driver has learned this valuable lesson and will be doubly cautious next time. Thankfully he had the presence of mind not to accelerate at least near kids which many morons do.

Originally Posted by AutoNoob

And there goes the charge of DUI, unless alcometer test/ blood sample was taken immediately after the accident.

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe alcohol shows in our blood for 24 hours?

As accident happened in evening and he was arrested next morning there is a good chance of alcohol still in system unless people have been paid not to show it.

Edit- Quick Google search throws this.