STATE OF H.P. Vs. TARA CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SURJIT Singh, J, Heard and gone through the record.

(2.) RESPONDENT was sent up for trial for offences under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC for allegedly driving truck No.HP-09-0997 in a rash or negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety of others and while so driving causing an accident resulting in the death of a female child aged about three years, on 24th January, 1997 at 3.30 p.m., at a place between Kumarsain and Narkanda.

(3.) PROSECUTION examined Bimla Devi (PW-1), the mother of the child, and one more lady named Durga Devi (PW-2) to prove its case. Both the witnesses stated that it was the respondent who was driving the truck that caused the accident. PW-2 Durga Devi, per her own testimony, was at a distance of about 250 feet from the site of the accident. She does not say that she had noted the number of the truck. However, she says that the truck was being driven by the respondent. It is not believable that from a distance of 250 feet she could have properly seen the face of the driver of the speeding truck. Testimony of Bimla Devi that it was the respondent who was driving the truck that caused the accident which has resulted in the death of her daughter can also not be believed because, per her testimony, she identified the respondent 5-6 days after the accident when he was with the police. Nobody from the Police Station has been examined to seek corroboration to the testimony of PW-1 that she had identified the respondent as the driver of the truck during the investigation. Admittedly, no test identification parade was held. Another reason is that even though in her statement PW-1 Bimla Devi says that she was behind the child, but in the FIR she got recorded that she was walking ahead of the child.