STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. CHAUHAN MOHMAD HANIF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Wadhwan (for short the 'ld.Magistrate'), dated 05.06.1996 in Criminal Case No.869/1993. The ld.Magistrate acquitted the respondent accused for the offence punishabl e under Section 279, 304 -A of Indian Penal Code and Section 184, 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Being aggrieved by the impunged judgment and order delivered by the ld.Magistrate, the State of Gujarat preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(2.) THE prosecution case in nutshell is that on 24.08.1993, at about 5.30 a.m., on National Highway, near Village Baldana, vehicular accident occurred. That the accused was driving S.T. bus bearing No.GJ -1Z -2264. It is the case of the prosecution that at the time of accident, the accused was driving his bus with full speed, rashly and negligently, and dashed his bus with one Sajanbhai Rupabhai Bharvad and two cows. Sajanbhai Rupabhai Bharvad succumbed to the injuries. The accused himself reported the incidence before Police. Investigating Police Officer recorded the statement of witnesses, prepared relevant panchnama in presence of Panchas, and after completion of investigation, filed chargesheet in the Court of the ld. Magistrate. Since the accused did not plead guilty, the ld.Magistrate recorded the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The deposition of witness Khodabhai Hindubhai was recorded at Exh.3, deposition of witness Jivanbhai Rupabhai was recorded at Exh.4, deposition of Sajanbhai Chhaganbhai is recorded at Exh.12, deposition of witness Ahmedlatif Navajuddin is recorded at Exh.13 and deposition of Investigating Police Officer Bharatsinh Khumansinh Zala is recorded at Exh.14. No more witness was examined by the prosecution. During the course of evidence, the prosecution produced relevant documentary evidence. After the evidence was closed, the ld.Magistrate recorded further statement of the accused, wherein he denied the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution. After hearing arguments advanced by both the parties, the ld.Magistrate by virture of the impugned judgment and order, came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the case against the accused. Ultimately, the ld.Magistrate by virtue of the impugned judgment and order, acquitted the accused. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of acquittal passed by the ld.Magistrate, the State of Gujarat preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) LEARNED A.P.P. Shri Mengde for the appellant State, submitted that the ld.Magistrate erred in coming to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the case against the accused. That as a matter of fact, the case of the prosecution is supported by the testimonies of eye -witnesses. That the accident occured during the early morning, at National Highway, and except those eye -witnesses, none else was available on road. Therefore, there was no reason to discard the depositions of eye -witnesses. That the accused himself reported the accident before the police. Therefore, there is no question of any identity of the accused. The accused himself was driving the bus. Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the Trial Court be set -aside and the accused be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 279, 304 -A of Indian Penal Code and Section 184 and 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act by allowing the appeal.