PANKAJ BHADANA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner Pankaj Bhadana to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 21.09.2012 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.38/2012 endorsing the findings of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate convicting him for commission of offences punishable under Sections 279/304A IPC by a judgment dated 25.04.2011. By an order dated 18.05.2012, he was sentenced to undergo SI for twelve months with fine Rs.1,000/- under Section 304A IPC and SI for three months under Section 279 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as reflected in the charge-sheet was that on 18.01995 at around 07.00 p.m. in front of bus stop near Kailash Building, K.G.Marg, the petitioner while driving the vehicle DL 1P 3590 in a rash and negligent manner inflicted injuries to the victim S.K.Setia who expired subsequently. Daily Diary (DD) No.26A came to be recorded at Police Station Connaught Place on 18.01995. The investigation was assigned to SI Jawahar Singh who along with Const.Dhan Singh went to the spot. After recording statement of Const.Laxman Singh, the Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report. The victim was taken to RML Hospital for treatment. On 25.01995, the victim was shifted to Ganga Ram Hospital where he expired. Post-mortem examination on the body was conducted. Statements of the witnesses conversant with facts were recorded. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner in the Court for commission of the offences mentioned previously. The trial resulted in conviction. The appeal preferred by him was also dismissed.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Petitioner's counsel urged that the Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in its true and proper perspective and fell into error in recording conviction on the sole testimony of two police officials whose presence at the spot could not be established. None of these police officials informed the PCR; took the injured to the hospital. No DD entry regarding their being on patrolling duty at the relevant time has been produced on record. It was further urged that the victim had got discharge from RML Hospital against medical advice. Victim's cause of death at Ganga Ram Hospital is doubtful. It was further urged that the petitioner has suffered trial for more than 20 years and has remained in custody for certain duration; he deserves leniency. Learned APP urged that no valid or sound reasons exist to disbelieve the testimonies of the police officials who were present at the spot and had witnessed the accident.