HARWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner/accused -Harwinder Singh, has preferred this revision against the judgment dated 21.4.2005 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Hoshiarpur, vide which he dismissed the appeal filed by the accused against the judgment dated 5.1.2001 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hoshiarpur, convicting him for the offences under Sections 279 and 304A IPC and sentencing him as under:

(2.) AS per the prosecution version, on 7.11.1998 Swaran Singh deceased and Kamaljit Singh, complainant P.W. 3, had come to the shop of Ramji, situated in the Bus Stand of Mahilpur, for purchasing clothes etc.. After making the purchases, they came out of the shop and had just taken a turn for going to their village when the accused came driving the bus bearing registration No. PB -12A -8843 (hereinafter referred to as the bus), after taking a turn around the Octroi from the side of Garhshankar and without blowing any horn, and while driving the same negligently, struck the same in Sawarn Singh as a result of which he fell down and the front wheel of the bus brushed with his head. After arranging for the conveyance, the complainant was removing the injured/deceased to the doctor, but he succumbed to his injuries on the way. On the same day, Jeet Lal ASI P.W. 5, along with other police officials, was present in the limits of Mahilpur in connection with patrolling. When he reached near the new bus stand Mahilpur, the complainant met him and made his statement Ex.P.W. 3/A regarding this accident. The ASI after making his endorsement Ex.P.W. 5/A upon the same, sent that to the police station, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.P.W. 5/B was recorded against the accused under Sections 279 and 304A IPC. Accompanied by the complainant, ASI went to the place of accident and prepared rough site plan Ex.P.W. 5/C with the correct marginal notes. He prepared inquest report Ex.P.W. 5/D in respect of the dead body of the deceased and sent the same to Civil Hospital for post mortem examination. On the same day the bus involved in the accident was taken into possession vide memo Ex.P.W. 5/E. The autopsy on the dead body of the deceased was performed by Dr. Rachhpal Singh P.W. 1, who found ante mortem injuries on the same and gave his opinion that the cause of death was due to shock and hemorrhage, as a result of injuries No. 3 and 4, which were sufficient to cause the death of the deceased in the ordinary course of nature. On 8.11.1998, the accused was arrested, who produced his driving license before the ASI and the same was taken into possession vide a recovery memo. On that very day the bus was mechanically tested by Neeraj Kumar Constable Mechanic P.W. 6, who found the same to be in mechanical order and gave his report Ex.P.W. 6/A. On 13.11.1998, Pargat Singh Inspector Punjab Roadways produced the registration certificate of the bus before ASI and the same was taken into possession vide a recovery memo. The documents, viz. entry register regarding the bus Ex.P.W. 7/A, way bill of the bus Ex.P.W. 7/B and the copy of the duty register Ex.P.W. 7/C bus, were also taken into possession by the ASI. After the completion of investigation, the challan was put in before Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Hoshiarpur, who found sufficient grounds for presuming that the accused committed offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304A IPC. He was charged accordingly, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To prove his guilt prosecution examined Dr. Rachhpal Singh P.W. 1, Dr. Gian Chand P.W. 2, Kamaljit Singh P.W. 3, Tarsem Singh P.W. 4, Jit Lal ASI P.W. 5, Neeraj Kumar Constable P.W. 6, Kamaljit Singh Duty Clerk, P.W. 7 and Dilbagh Singh, Clerk P.W. 8. After the evidence was closed by the prosecution, the accused was examined and his statement was recorded under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure. The incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence were put to him in order to enable him to explain the same. He denied all those circumstances and pleaded his innocence. He stated that his bus was never involved in any accident with a bicycle and the number of the bus was wrongly given by the complainant in order to claim compensation regarding the death of the deceased. He was called upon to enter on his defence and he examined Darshan Singh D.W. 1 in his defence evidence.

(3.) IT has been submitted by learned Counsel for the accused that an illegality was committed by the trial Court and Appellate Court while relying on the solitary statement of Kamaljit Singh complainant P.W. 3, who was an interested witness. According to the investigating officer, there were shops near the place of accident but neither any shop -keeper was joined in investigation nor statement of any such shop -keeper was recorded. The prosecution story stands falsified from the statements of Neeraj Kumar Mechanic P.W. 6, who mechanically tested the bus and Kamaljit Singh Duty Clerk P.W. 7, who produced the records of the bus in the Court. As per those records, the bus started from Nawanshahr at 12.20 PM and the alleged accident took place at a distance of hardly 10 KMs from that place. The bus would not take two hours to cover such a short distance as according to the complainant the accident had taken place at 2.15 PM. Neeraj Kumar P.W. 6 did not find any dent in the bumper of the bus nor any blood stains were found, which shows that the same was not involved in the accident. He further submitted that the identity of the accused was not established during the trial as, according to the complainant, the accused was not known to him previously and no test identification parade was held during investigation. In the last, he referred to the defence evidence produced by the accused and according to him from that evidence it stands proved that no accident took place with the bus of the accused and he has been falsely implicated. He prayed for his acquittal and in the alternative to release him on probation, being a government employee.