NEERAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges his conviction under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court convicted the petitioner for offences under Sections 279, 337 and 338 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for various terms. The appellate Court convicted the petitioner for imprisonment of two months and fine of Rs. 500/ - for offences under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE brief facts necessary for the purpose of decision of this petition are that F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of statement made by PW8 Ram Dass and one Prem Dass who were going from Kanaid school towards their home in a taxi on 26.9.2001. At around 9.40 p.m., they found the petitioner accused driving the scooter in a very rash and negligent manner which struck against complainant PW2 Vijay Kumar who walking on the road. Deepak Kumar, who was the pillion rider of the scooter, also sustained injuries in this accident. He has not been examined as a witness. On the evidence of three witnesses, namely, PW8 Ram Dass, PW1 Prem Singh and injured PW2 Vijay Kumar, the learned trial Court convicted the petitioner despite the fact that one of the witnesses PW1 Prem Singh turned hostile and was cross -examined but despite that the accident was held to have been established.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioner urges that there is perversity in the appreciation of evidence as neither PW8 Ram Dass, who was one of the eye witness nor PW1 Prem Singh have supported the case of the prosecution. In am not inclined to accept this submission more especially when the injured himself has given a graphic of description of how he was struck by the scooter which was being driven by the petitioner in a rash and negligent manner. In the circumstances even if the statement of other two witnesses is discarded, the factum of the accident stands established on the record of the case.