{"id":919061,"date":"2026-05-18T10:47:56","date_gmt":"2026-05-18T08:47:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/"},"modified":"2026-05-18T10:47:56","modified_gmt":"2026-05-18T08:47:56","slug":"supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 – police v jadu"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

police v jadu<\/p>\n

2026 MOK 23<\/p>\n

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MOKA<\/p>\n

CN:1407\/19<\/p>\n

Police v Niroopam JADU<\/p>\n

Judgment<\/p>\n

Accused is being prosecuted for involuntary wounds and blows by imprudence in breach of s239(1) (2) of the Criminal Code and s133 and 52 of the Road Traffic Act<\/p>\n

He pleaded not guilty and was represented by Counsel.<\/p>\n

The prosecution produced the following documents: 1. PF 58 of witness 4 which shows abrasion on right hand and swelling at the right ankle. 2. Report from the Ministry of Public Infrastructure dated 8.8.14 which shows the estimated costs of repairs to be Rs 4000\/- 3. NTA report 4. Road accident report of the 2 vehicles involved in the accident.<\/p>\n

Witness 1 was called. He attended the locus and took down notes and measurements under the instructions of the accused. He produced the rough sketch as well as the statement explaining same. He also produced the defence statement of accused. He confirmed that on the material date, he attended the spot and the road was wet. There was a clear visibility and the declarant was not present on spot.<\/p>\n

In his defence statement, accused related that in the material day, at 6.25 a.m, he was riding his motorcycle coming from the direction of St Jean and proceeding towards Quartier Militaire on the left side of the road. When he reached a certain spot, he saw a motorbus coming from the opposite direction with full beam of light. The spot was obscure and there was fog, it was raining, he got dazzled by the beam of light of the bus and his motorcycle collided with an autocycle proceeding in the same direction as him. He had not noticed the autocycle as it had no tail light and the person had not worn any fluorescent jacket. He was injured as a result of the accident.<\/p>\n

The enquiring officer was cross examined. He agreed that the road was wet, however it was not that foggy. He confirmed that as per the statement of accused,<\/p>\n

declarant did not have a fluorescent jacket nor had a taillight on his vehicle. Accused was not under the influence of alcohol.<\/p>\n

No other witnesses were called , having all passed away.<\/p>\n

The defence did not adduce any evidence.<\/p>\n

I have taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n

The court has considered the evidence elicited by the prosecution in the form of witness testimony as well as the documentary evidence which have been produced. I have also considered the answers given by the prosecution witness in cross- examination and the out-of-court version of the accused during the enquiry.<\/p>\n

In a case like the present one, the court is aware that the test is one of objectivity, that is, the court needs to assess whether, by his conduct, the accused has departed from the standard of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in the particular circumstances<\/p>\n

In Chadee v State (2011 SCJ 149), the Supreme Court held :\u201cOn a charge of imprudence, the focus should not be on the choice of versions between that of the prosecution and the defence but whether objectively speaking the driver in question may be stated to have driven his motor vehicle with the standard required in the given conditions of light, weather, time and traffic as revealed generally by the particular facts and circumstances of the case of which the trial court is the sovereign judge. The test is an objective one as decided in McCrone v Riding [1938] 1 All ER 157. What the prosecution has to prove is \u201cthat the defendant has departed from the standard of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case\u201d.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, in Wilkinson\u2019s Road Traffic Offences 11thEdition, \u201ccareless driving\u201d is defined as follows: \u201c…departing from the standard of driving which would be exercised by a reasonable, prudent, competent driver in all circumstances of the particular case. It follows that a person who drives without reasonable consideration for other road users can be convicted of driving without due care and attention.\u201d<\/p>\n

The circumstances of the present road accident are quite straightforward. It is undisputed that the accused was riding a motorcycle, was dazzled by the full beam of an incoming vehicle and he knocked against the autocycle in front of him. Accused stated that the rider in the autocycle in front of him was apparently was not wearing his fluorescent jacket and did not have any tail light.<\/p>\n

However, he admitted that he had his headlight as well as tail lights on. Other than the out of court version of the accused, there there is no evidence that the tail light of the autocycle was not on and that the person was not wearing his fluorescent jacket. The moreso, in the pf70 the examiner found that the tail light was broken. Nevertheless, I do not find that these exculpate Accused of his responsibility as a driver given the following :<\/p>\n

a. Accused himself admitted that he was dazzled by the of an incoming vehicle; b. His headlight was on, hence he should have seen the vehicle in front of him c. He knocked against the vehicle at the rear d. The distance at which his motorcycle was found and the point of impact as shown by the rider. I am of the opinion that considering same and the tyre marks found thereat, this could only have been the result of a high speed at which the accused was riding at . e. It was raining and the road was wet, hence regarding the prevailing conditions, he should have been more prudent as a driver.<\/p>\n

In Ramburn v The State ( 2013 SCJ 472) , it was held by the Supreme Court that \u201cBesides, for the \u201cfaute\u201d of the victim of an accident to completely excuse the \u201cfaute\u201d of the driver the victim\u2019s \u201cfaute\u201d must have been exclusive and unpredictable \u2013vide note 56, Gar\u00e7on Code P\u00e9nal Annot\u00e9, Art 319.<\/p>\n

This is not the case in the present matter. As such, there is no evidence on record to show that the act of the rider of the autocycle was so \u201c grossi\u00e8re quelle fait dispara\u00eere en realit\u00e9 toute faute de la part de l\u2019auteur de la victime\u201d<\/p>\n

Also, regarding the version that he was dazzled by the headlights of an incoming vehicle, the accused was present on spot when notes and measurements were being taken by the enquiry officer, he did not point out the spot where he was when he first noticed the oncoming vehicle nor did he point out the spot where he reached when he was dazzled by the headlamps. Furthermore, there is nothing elicited in evidence to show the likelihood that one could simply lose control of one\u2019s vehicle just by having an oncoming vehicle\u2019s headlamps in one\u2019s field of vision.<\/p>\n

Considering the conduct of the accused in the particular circumstances, including the weather conditions, I am of the view that a reasonable, prudent and competent driver who was driving at a reasonable speed would not have lost control of his vehicle merely owing to being dazzled by the headlamps of an oncoming vehicle. Any competent and experienced driver would have dealt with dazzling headlamps of incoming vehicles enough to know how to handle these situations. In the given circumstances, the court is of the view that the conduct of the accused party was below par the standard of driving of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver.<\/p>\n

I consequently find that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and I find the accused guilty as charged.<\/p>\n

G.Rampoortab Senior District Magistrate 13.05.26<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Sources officielles :<\/strong> consulter la page source<\/a> · PDF officiel<\/a><\/p>\n

Supreme Court of Mauritius – public domain<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

police v jadu 2026 MOK 23 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MOKA CN:1407\/19 Police v Niroopam JADU Judgment Accused is being prosecuted for involuntary wounds and blows by imprudence in breach of s239(1) (2) of the Criminal Code and s133 and 52 of the Road Traffic Act He pleaded not guilty and was represented by Counsel. The prosecution produced the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":[],"kji_country":[92666],"kji_court":[92667],"kji_chamber":[92677],"kji_year":[7610],"kji_subject":[7646],"kji_keyword":[15757,8066,15594],"kji_language":[7611],"class_list":["post-919061","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-maurice","kji_court-supreme-court-of-mauritius","kji_chamber-mrs-g-rampoortab-senior-district-magistrate","kji_year-7610","kji_subject-divers","kji_keyword-mauritius","kji_keyword-police","kji_keyword-supreme","kji_language-anglais"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 - police v jadu - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 - police v jadu\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"police v jadu 2026 MOK 23 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MOKA CN:1407\/19 Police v Niroopam JADU Judgment Accused is being prosecuted for involuntary wounds and blows by imprudence in breach of s239(1) (2) of the Criminal Code and s133 and 52 of the Road Traffic Act He pleaded not guilty and was represented by Counsel. The prosecution produced the...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\\\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 - police v jadu - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-18T08:47:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 – police v jadu\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp\",\"width\":1000,\"height\":1000,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 - police v jadu - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 - police v jadu","og_description":"police v jadu 2026 MOK 23 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MOKA CN:1407\/19 Police v Niroopam JADU Judgment Accused is being prosecuted for involuntary wounds and blows by imprudence in breach of s239(1) (2) of the Criminal Code and s133 and 52 of the Road Traffic Act He pleaded not guilty and was represented by Counsel. The prosecution produced the...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/","name":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 - police v jadu - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-05-18T08:47:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/supreme-court-of-mauritius-13-mai-2026-2026-mok-23-police-v-jadu\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/criminal-law-attorneys-in-paris-counsel-and-strategic-defense\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Supreme Court of Mauritius, 13 mai 2026, 2026 MOK 23 – police v jadu"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Logo-Kohen-1000.webp","width":1000,"height":1000,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/919061","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=919061"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=919061"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=919061"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=919061"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=919061"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=919061"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=919061"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=919061"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}