STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SIB CHARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the State of Orissa against an order dated 28-6-1961 passed by Sri P. B. Das, Magistrate, First Class in G. R. Case No. 1215 of 1961, acquitting the accused-respondent of a charge under Section 304-A, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case against the accused was that on 19-12-1960 at about 4 P.M., the respondent-accused while driving the motor vehicle No. ORN. 1615 rashly and negligently caused the death of an old woman Randei Mundani. A prima facie case having been made out after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused on 8-2-1961 under Section 279/304-A, I. P. C. After several adjournments on account of the absence of the accused the case was fixed to 4-4-1961, when ultimately the accused appeared and the case was transferred to the file of the aforesaid Magistrate. On 9-5-1961 a charge under Section 304-A was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty, and the Magistrate directed issue of summons for the prosecution witnesses fixing 25-5-1961. On 25-5-1961 the service returns were not back and so the case was again posted to 13-6-1961 on which date the prosecuting officer reported to the court that none of the witnesses was available at Rourkela and wanted time on that ground. The Court directed that a set of summons and an extract of the order of the Court be issued to the investigating officer, and the case was posted to 23-61961 on which date also the witnesses could not be produced and ultimately it was again posted to 28-6-196.1. On 28-6-1961 the Court Sub-inspector filed a further petition for adjournment for production of witnesses as they were not available at Rourkela and so he prayed for some more time in order to ascertain their present addresses and to issue summons through special messenger to their village addresses. The learned Magistrate, however, rejected the petition, examined the accused under Section 342, Cr. P. C. and acquitted: him. The reason recorded by the learned Magistrate was that there was no evidence whatsoever produced by the prosecution to prove the case and therefore he acquitted the accused. Thus, the order of acquittal is not based upon the merits of the case, but merely on account of non-production of witnesses in the Court.

(3.) From the charge-sheet if appears that as many as eight persons were named as witnesses in support of the prosecution. The learned Advocate-General appearing for the State contended that the trying Magistrate had acted illegally in rejecting the petition of the prosecution to produce the witnesses in Court, and in any case summons would have been issued by the Court itself for enforcing the attendance of the witnesses; and merely because the prosecution was unable to produce the witnesses, there is no justification Whatsoever for ordering acquittal of the accused.