PRADEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was found guilty of the offences under Sections 304-A, 338 and 337 of the I.P.C.For the offence under Section 304-A of the I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and a fine of Rs. 2000/-. For the offence under Section 338 of the I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs. 500/- and for the offence under Section 337, I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months and fine of Rs. 400/-. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. He filed appeal in the Court of Session. The appeal was dismissed.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the accident took place on 17-9-1982 at about 10.15 p.m. The vehicle driven by the petitioner was a four wheeler bearing No. HRM 859 which dashed with truck No. PUK 7017 driven by one Mohinder Singh, who was also co-accused in the trial Court along with the petitioner. The truck was coming from the opposite side. The four wheeler which the petitioner was driving is alleged to have been driven at a high speed and was carrying 32 passengers and two goats. Appeals filed by the driver of the truck Mohinder Singh also met with the same fate.

(3.) The question to be considered is whether there is an infirmity in the finding that the petitioner was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The trial Court has relied on the cases of Mahadev Ballappa Babshet v. Ramesh Narayan Nagwekar, 1977 ACJ (Kant) 1 and Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanjamma, 1977 ACJ (Kant) 241. In both these cases the drivers of both the vehicles were held negligent. However, the judgments relate to the civil cases., i.e. Motor Accident Claim cases and I find that it will not be proper to apply the doctrine in the present case which is a criminal case, where guilt is required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.