RAM LAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been directed against the judgment dated 17.4.2006 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Shimla in Criminal Appeal No. 42 -S/10 of 2005 affirming judgment dated 29/30. 8.2005 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Shimla in Case No. 134/2 of 2003 whereby the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 IPC and Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that complainant Amit Nanda along with his friends Ashwani Doger, Bharat Bhushan and Sanjay Nagpal were going towards Dhalli from Vikasnagar, Shimla in their vehicle CH -03F -2499 which was being driven by Ashwani Doger. At place near Panthaghati a fast driven truck No. HP -19 -4170 came from opposite wrong side and hit the car as a result of which all the occupants of the car received injuries. On the statement of Amit Nanda, FIR was registered at Police Station East, Shimla against the petitioner. On completion of investigation, challan was submitted in the Court. The notice of accusation was put to the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 IPC and Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act. He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined eight witnesses.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the two Courts below have misconstrued the evidence on record and erred in convicting and sentencing the petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 279, 337 IPC and for offence punishable under Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act. The learned Assistant Advocate General has supported the impugned judgment. He has submitted that the view taken by the two Courts below emerges from the evidence on record and in revision the evidence cannot be re -appreciated.