UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH Vs. GEJA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present appeal, the Union Territory of Chandigarh, impugnes the order of the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chandigarh dated 22.4.1988, acquitting the represent of the charges under Sections 279/304-A of IPC. A factual narrative of the case would be appropriate.

(2.) ON 28.2.1986, at about 2.15 PM, Ravinder Kaur D/o Amrik Singh, PW-1, lodged a report Ex. PA with the police. She and her friend Rupinder Kaur (the deceased) were returning from college, riding separate bicycles. Rupinder Kaur was a little ahead. When they approached the traffic round about of Sectors 26/27/7/19, a speeding truck came from behind and struck Rupinder Kaur's cycle causing her to fall down. She was run over by rear wheel of the truck. The truck driver fled from the scene of the accident but the complainant was able to note down the number of the truck. A police van arrived immediately. The complainant narrated the entire occurrence. The truck was apprehended and the driver brought to the place of occurrence. Rupinder Kaur was rushed to the hospital, where she was declared dead. The respondent was charged with offences under Sections 279/304-A of IPC and upon pleading not guilty of the offences, claimed trial.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant contends that the findings returned by the trial Court, acquitting the respondent, are factually incorrect, based upon an erroneous appreciation of evidence and law and have thus, resulted in a miscarriage of justice, thus, warranting the setting aside of the judgment. It is further argued that the reasons set forth by the trial Court for acquitting the respondent are inherently unsound and legally unsustainable. An appraisal of the evidence, adduced by the prosecution could lead to only one conclusion, namely; the truck was being driven at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner. The learned trial Court acquitted the respondent on two grounds firstly that PW-1 did not depose that the truck was being in a rash and negligent manner and secondly a truck could not be driven at a high speed at the place of accident.