KARAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Karam Singh petitioner has filed this revision to challenge the judgment dated 12.10.2000 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, upholding the conviction and sentence under sections 279,337,338 and 304-A Penal Code recorded against him by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khanna.

(2.) According to the case of the prosecution, Daljit Singh complainant made a statement before the police that in the morning of 10.6.1998 he along with his wife Surinder Kaur was going from Mandi Ahamedgarh to Khanna on his scooter bearing No.PB-10-E-7071. At about 10.30 AM, when they reached near Bijja Chowk G.T. Road Khanna, a bus of Haryana Roadways bearing Registration No. HR-29-PA-0108 being driven by the petitioner in a rash and negligent manner at a very high speed came from behind and hit the scooter. After the impact the scooter was dragged for some distance and as a result of which, both Daljit Singh and his wife Surinder Kaur suffered multiple injuries. The driver of the bus had not only stopped the bus but also disclosed his name and address, arranged a vehicle for removal of the injured to the Civil Hospital, Khanna. Surinder Kaur did not survive. Information of the injured having been brought to the civil Hospital, Khanna was sent to the SHO, Police Station, Sadar Khanna, where after Police official reached the hospital and ASI Karnail Singh recorded the statement of Daljit Singh complainant. Investigating Officer had then proceeded to the place of occurrence and got the same photographed. On completion of the investigation, during the course whereof the petitioner had been arrested, challan was put in court against the petitioner.

(3.) On perusal of the challan, charges under sections 279, 337, 338 and 304- A Penal Code were framed against the petitioner by the learned trial court and when the petitioner pleaded not guilty, the prosecution was called upon to lead evidence in support of its case. On completion of prosecution evidence, when questioned under section 313 Cr.PC, the petitioner denied all the allegations and asserted that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. However, he did not lead any evidence in his defence.