CHANDER BHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) To challenge the judgment dated 09.03.2007 of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, (for short 'appellate Court') whereby judgement of conviction dated 10.11.2005 and order of sentence dated 11.11.2005, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat (for short 'trial court') have been affirmed with the modification of reducing the substantive sentence of the petitioner, under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') from two years to one year rigorous imprisonment for driving vehicle bearing registration No. DL-1P/7315 on road in a rash and negligent manner, is under challenge in the instant criminal revision petition brought by the convict-petitioner. Respondent-State is contesting the revision petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner impugns the correctness of the aforesaid judgement of conviction and order of sentence on the plea that the learned trial Court has illegally and erroneously convicted and sentenced the petitioner even though no evidence of the occurrence is available on record and the learned appellate Court has also ignored this aspect of the matter. According to him, the Investigating Officer of the case as also the eye witness of the occurrence cited by the prosecution have not been examined and the only witness of occurrence namely Ashok Kumar ( PW-2) who has been relied upon in proof of the factum of occurrence, has not been able to give correct time and manner of the occurrence and has admitted in his cross-examination that he was sitting behind driver's seat with his face backwards and that being so, he cannot be accepted to have witnessed the occurrence.

(3.) Learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, on the other hand, defends the impugned judgement and order and submits that in the evidence available on record, occurrence has been proved beyond any manner of doubt and non-examination of the Investigating Officer and other eye witnesses of the occurrence is inconsequential. Case of the prosecution before the learned trial Court was that the petitioner was driving a bus bearing registration No. DL-1P/7315 on 29.12.1999 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety of others and in the process, caused, simple injuries to Amit, Anil, Rajesh Kumar, Satpal, Anil son of Tilak Ram, Sunder Lal, Balwan Singh, Ashok Kumar and complainant Sabir and, grievous injuries to Ashok Kumar and complainant Sabir besides causing death of one Kanwar Lal. According to the prosecution story, the complainant Sabir was a driver on a tempo bearing registration No. HR46A/5195. At about 8:00 A.M. on 29.12.1999, after making the passengers to sit in his tempo, when he reached near Atul Nursery, Murthal Road, Sonepat, a bus bearing registration No. DL-1P/7315 (for short 'offending bus') being driven by the petitioner in a rash and negligent manner, came from the opposite side and the driver of that bus banged the bus into the tempo, resulting into injuries on the persons of the aforesaid persons and causing death of one Kanwar Lal.