KEHAR SINGH Vs. STATE NCT DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 27.1.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 39/2005 which, in turn, was directed against the judgment of the trial court dated 25.5.2005 and order of sentence dated 30.5.2005. The trial court had convicted the petitioner under Sections 279/337/304-A IPC and had sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- under Sections 279/337 IPC and a further sentence of one year RI (to run concurrently) and a fine of Rs.1000/- under Section 304-A IPC was also imposed. Being aggrieved by this, the petitioner had preferred the aforesaid appeal which was dismissed upholding the conviction and sentence Against that order of dismissal of the appeal dated 27.1.2006, the present revision petition has been filed.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has advanced two arguments. First of all he submitted that the petitioner had not been identified by PW1 (Pritpal Singh) and yet the petitioner has been convicted. The second argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that upon going through the order in appeal, there is no finding that the petitioner had done any act which was rash or negligent and, therefore, the ingredients of Section 304A IPC were not made out.

(3.) Before I examine the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be necessary to set out the brief facts which give rise to the present revision petition. On 24.11.1996 at about 2.10 p.m. at Prabhat Road, Ramjas Lane, the petitioner is said to have been driving a milk tanker bearing registration No. UP-13B 8021. While driving the said milk tanker, the petitioner is said to have struck a motorcycle bearing registration No.DLO-52. As a result of this impact, the pillion rider Arjun Bhagat died on the spot and the driver of the motorcycle Pritpal Singh (PW1) received simple injuries. In fact, the impact was such that the wheel of the tanker went over the motorcycle and caused the death of the said Arjun Bhagat. After completion of the investigation etc., the charge sheet was filed under Sections 279/337/304-A IPC against the petitioner and charges were, accordingly, framed thereafter under the very same Sections. The petitioner having pleaded not guilty, the trial commenced and as many as 11 prosecution witnesses were examined. The petitioner had made a Section 281 Cr.P.C. statement which was also recorded in which he is said to have denied the allegations leveled against him and that he has been falsely implicated. However, after considering all the arguments and the evidence on record, the trial court, as aforesaid, convicted the petitioner under Sections 279/337/304-A IPC and this conviction was confirmed in appeal.