STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. KULDEEP CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is maintained by the appellant-State of Himachal Pradesh against the judgment of acquittal of accused in a case under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nalagarh, District Solan (H.P) dated 12.11.2008, in Criminal Case No.63/2 of 2004.

(2.) Briefly stating facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 5.12.2003, Police of Police Station, Nalagarh, received a telephonic message from Civil Hospital, Nalagarh, that two injured have been brought in the hospital with the alleged history of roadside accident. HC Sunil Kumar, has recorded the statement of complainant, under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which, he has stated that he is working as a worker in 'Laxmi Brick Kiln' Baglehan alongwith his wife. According to him, at about 3:00 p.m, he had sent his son Ankit to purchase 'biri bundle' from the nearby shop, when he was coming back after purchasing the aforesaid articles and when he was crossing the road, Maruti van came from Nalagarh side in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety of others struck against the legs of child. Thereafter, the injured child was lifted in the same vehicle bearing registration No.HP-01-3116 for medical treatment to Civil Hospital, Nalgarh. This accident has taken place due to the rash and negligent act on the part of the accused. On the basis of aforesaid statement, HC Sunil Kumar, sent rukka through Constable Ram Pyara to Police Station, Nalagarh. The matter was reported to the police, on the basis of which, FIR Ex.PW5/B was registered. Statement of the witnesses was also recorded and site plan was prepared. Thereafter, codal formalities were completed and challan was presented in the Court.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as eleven witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein he has denied the prosecution case and claimed innocence. No defence evidence was led by the accused.