RAM MEHAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision and has been directed against judgment dated 5.7.1991 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jind who dismissed the appeal of Ram Mehar petitioner.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 23.6.1985 Sarvshri Baljit Singh, Kuldip Singh, Kitab Singh and Satbir Singh were going from Uchana Mandi to Jind on motor-cycle bearing registration No. HRJ-3000 which was being driven by Baljit Singh and the remaining persons were pillion riders. These people came from the side of Uchana Mandi and were proceeding towards Jind by driving motor-cycle on the main Jind-Narwana road. In the meantime, the petitioner came at a very fast speed from the side of Narwana and he was driving truck No. HYA-5325. It is alleged that a Jeep was also coming from the opposite side i.e. from Jind side, and was going towards Narwana. The petitioner did not blow horn nor he gave any indicator. It is alleged that the petitioner wanted to take his truck in the bylane towards right hand side and abruptly took his truck in that direction. It dashed against an electric pole. Thereafter it hit the motor-cycle which was being driven by Baljit Singh. The persons who were coming on the motor-cycle were also ran over by the truck. The injured were taken out from underneath the truck by several persons standing on the bus-stand and they were removed to the hospital. Kuldip Singh died at the spot and Baljit Singh died in the hospital and the remaining two pillion riders received multiple injuries. Siri Parkash ASI came to the spot on receiving information about the accident and he recorded the statement of Satbir Singh. Formal FIR was recorded and on the completion of the investigation of the case, the petitioner was challaned under Sections 279, 377 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of Area Magistrate who framed charges against the petitioner, who pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed a trial.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate vide judgment dated 19th March, 1991 came to the conclusion that the petitioner was guilty for the offence under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, which included the offence under Sections 337 and 279 IPC. He sentenced the petitioner under Section 304-A IPC to undergo RI for the period of nine months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, the petitioner was directed to further undergo RI for a period of two months. The learned Magistrate did not pass any separate sentence under Sections 279 and 337 IPC. The petitioner being not satisfied with the judgment and order of the learned trial Court, he filed an appeal before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, who vide impugned judgment dated 5th July, 1991, and for the reasons given in para Nos. 8, 9 and 10 dismissed the appeal. These three paragraphs of the judgment of the first Appellate Court are quoted below :