STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SURESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent was put on trial under Section 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, in case No.47/2 of 1995 and on 12.5.2000, he was acquitted by the learned trial court.

(2.) THE judgment of acquittal has been assailed in this appeal on the ground that the learned trial court did not appreciate the evidence of the prosecution in the right perspective and it also set an unrealistic standard to appreciate the evidence of the prosecution. Heard and gone through the record of the case.

(3.) NOTICE of accusation was put to the respondent. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined their witnesses to prove the charges. The case of the respondent under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been total denial. The learned trial court upon hearing the parties and going through the record of the case, acquitted the respondent, on the ground that the rash and negligent act of the respondent was not proved by the prosecution. Further the writings, which were alleged to have been given by the passengers of the Bus were not placed on the record nor the photographs were proved. The bus has not been shown in the spot map Ext.PW9/A, nor its photographs were taken. The prosecution has failed to prove the circumstances and fact of the accident by which the accident took place and further that the prosecution has also not cited the cleaner of the bus as a witness and as far as Section 337 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, these injuries were not proved having been sustained in the accident. Accordingly, the respondents was given the benefit of reasonable doubt. I have reappraised the evidence on record. The basis recorded for the acquittal by the learned trial court are absolutely incorrect, insofar as the Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned.