STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SANDEEP KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is maintained by the appellant-State of Himachal Pradesh assailing the judgment of acquittal of the accused-respondent (hereinafter to be called as "the accused") in case under Sections 279 & 337 & 338 of the Indian Penal Code, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. II, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P, dated 28.07.2008, in Criminal Case No. 270-II-04/03.

(2.) Briefly stating the facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, are that on 17.12.2002, at about 11:00 pm, near SBI, Palampur, the accused was driving maruti car, bearing registration No. HP-33A-0123, in a rash and negligent manner and hit the same to one Shri Ramesh Chand (hereinafter to be called as "the complainant"), who alongwith his wife was going to hospital and walking on the left side of the road. As a result of said accident, the complainant sustained simple as well as grievous injuries. After the said accident, the complainant was taken to the hospital and information was sent to the Police Station, vide ruka Ex. P-1. The statement of the complainant, Ext. PW-3/A was recorded under Section 154 Cr. PC, on the basis of which, FIR Ext. PW-7/B, was registered. The Police on moving the application, Ex. PW-7/A, before M.O. SDH, Palampur, for conducting medical examination of the complainant, obtained MLC, Ext. PW-2/B, x-ray films, Ext. PW-2/C and x-ray report, Ext. PW-2/A of the complainant. I.O. has prepared the spot map, Ext. PW-7/D, and took into possession the maruti car, alongwith its documents, vide memo, Ext. PW- 5/A. Statement of Himal Chand, Ext. PW-7/E, and Janender Sharma, Ext. PW-7/F, were also recorded.

(3.) Prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as seven witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C, wherein he denied the prosecution case and claimed innocence. Accused did not lead any defence evidence. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused, vide impugned judgment dated 28.07.2008, hence the present appeal.