STATE OF HP Vs. AJAY KATOCH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against acquittal of the respondent, passed by the learned trial Court in Criminal case No. 21-II/2007 dated 22.5.2010, the instant application seeking leave to appeal has been filed.

(2.) Heard and gone through the record of the case.

(3.) Complainant Jagdish Chand reported to Police the accident which had taken place on 2.11.2000 at 12.30 a.m., wherein Milkhi Ram had died on account of the alleged rash or negligent driving by the scooterist. The alleged offending scooter was bearing registration No.38-A-6480. The sole eye witness of the accident is Jagdish Chand PW1 himself but during the trial of the case he did not support the case of the prosecution with respect to the alleged rash or negligent driving of the driver. Further, he also expressed his ignorance about the registration number of the Scooter and could not identify the scooterist. PW5 Tilak Raj is owner of the Scooter. Though according to him he had lent the scooter to the respondent but did not say that respondent was responsible for the accident. PW3 Charan Dass son of the deceased also expressed the ignorance about the scooter having been involved in the accident. There is no other evidence connecting the respondent with the alleged offence.