Sharjah court clears tanker driver accused of hitting elderly man

Sharjah: A municipal sewage tanker driver accused of running over a 76-year-old pedestrian and leaving him injured without stopping to help has been cleared of all charges after the Sharjah Court of Cassation upheld his acquittal.

The Sharjah Court of Cassation rejected the Public Prosecution’s appeal, agreeing with an earlier ruling that the pedestrian had suddenly stepped into the path of the moving tanker, while the driver was unaware that an accident had occurred.

The driver had been accused of causing injuries through negligent driving and failing to stop, help the injured pedestrian or call for assistance after the accident.

How the accident happened

The incident took place on September 9, 2025, in the Al Seih neighbourhood of Dibba Al Hisn, while the driver was operating a municipal sewage tanker outside a house.

According to court records, the driver had finished work at the property and was preparing to move the tanker, which had been stationary. At the time, the 76-year-old pedestrian was walking behind the vehicle.

As the tanker began moving, the pedestrian suddenly changed direction and stepped in front of it. The vehicle struck him, causing him to fall and sustain injuries.

An accident scene sketch and technical traffic report showed that the pedestrian had not been walking on the pavement or along the extreme edge of the road. Instead, he moved across the tanker’s path as it started moving. The court also noted that the driver did not realise he had struck someone until people nearby alerted him.

Lawyer argues driver could not have avoided accident

The driver's defence, led by lawyer Mohammed Al Awami Al Mansoori, argued that the pedestrian's sudden movement caused the collision, leaving the driver with no reasonable opportunity to avoid it.

The defence told the court that the pedestrian had stepped out from behind the stationary tanker and walked directly into its path, despite a designated pavement being available nearby.

Al Mansoori also argued that the driver was unaware of the collision because the tanker's size, mechanical noise and visibility limitations made it difficult to detect the impact.

According to the defence, the driver only learned of the accident after police contacted him during their investigation, having identified the vehicle through surveillance camera footage.

The lawyer maintained that the evidence failed to establish criminal negligence or prove that the driver had knowingly left the scene of an accident. He further argued that the pedestrian's actions were the main cause of the collision, which the driver could not reasonably have prevented.

The court accepted the defence's arguments, concluding that the pedestrian's conduct had caused the accident and that the driver had no opportunity to avoid the collision.

From conviction to final acquittal

The case went through several stages of appeal before the final ruling.

The Dibba Al Hisn Court of First Instance convicted the driver on September 30, 2025, and fined him Dh2,000 for the two offences.

On October 27, 2025, the Khor Fakkan Court of Appeal increased the punishment to three months in prison.

The driver challenged that judgment before the Sharjah Court of Cassation, which overturned the appellate ruling on March 30, 2026, and sent his appeal back to a differently constituted panel for reconsideration.

On April 27, 2026, the new Khor Fakkan appeals panel overturned the original conviction and acquitted the driver of all charges.

The Public Prosecution then challenged the acquittal, arguing that the appeals court had wrongly cleared the driver of responsibility.

It relied on the traffic accident report, which attributed 80 per cent of the fault to the driver and 20 per cent to the pedestrian.

Why the Court of Cassation upheld the acquittal

In its ruling on November 2, 2026, the Sharjah Court of Cassation rejected the prosecution's appeal and upheld the driver's acquittal.

The court said that determining negligence and responsibility for an accident, as well as assessing the link between an act and the resulting injury, were factual matters that fell within the authority of the court hearing the case.

It added that the appeals court was entitled to assess the traffic accident report, technical findings and other evidence, and rely on the material it considered convincing, provided its conclusions were supported by the case records.

The Court of Cassation found no legal grounds to overturn the acquittal. Its ruling leaves the April 27 judgment in force and brings the case to a final close.