SHEOKARAN Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dated 17.12.2005 passed by learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, cases, Tonk in Criminal Appeal No.45/2005 upholding the judgment dated 16.7.2004 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoli, District Tonk in Cr. Case No.888/2003 (424/95) whereby revisionist was convicted and sentenced as follows : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_162_LAWS(RAJ)7_2016_1.html</FRM>

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this revision are that on 24.11.1995 at about 12.30 PM , complainant Gulab Chand S/o Shri Kana Ram (PW-1) submitted a written report (Ex.P-1) before ASI - Ganpat Singh of Police Station, Deoli at the site of accident stating inter alia that today (on 24.11.1995) at about 12.00 noon when Manni W/o Shri Lala Ram, who is wife of his elder brother, was coming along with her son Mukesh aged about 11/2 years from market to home. On the Bharatpur house road which goes towards agency, a truck No. RJ06-G-0689 came with fast speed from Deoli side. It crushed child Mukesh, who died on the spot. Sheokaran Jat R/o Bhopalpura was driving the truck, who is known to him. On this report, ASI, Shri Ganpat Singh made an endorsement and brought it to police station and registered a regular FIR No.277/95 (Ex.P-12). After investigation, a charge sheet against the revisionist for the offence punishable u/s 279 and 304-A IPC was submitted before learned Judicial Magistrate, Deoli. The revisionist was read over the substance of accusations for offence punishable u/s 279 and 304-A IPC. He denied the charges and claimed trial. Accused petitioner was examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C. He stated that the evidence adduced by prosecution is wrong. He was not driving the truck at the time of accident. No defence evidence of any kind was produced. After hearing both the parties, learned trial court vide judgment dated 16.7.2004 convicted and sentenced the revisionist petitioner, as aforesaid. On appeal, learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, cases, Tonk after hearing both the parties dismissed the appeal vide its judgment dated 17.12.2005 and upheld the judgment of learned trial court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submit that while passing the impugned judgment, learned courts below did not consider the fact that no independent witness was examined and all the witnesses were interested and also did not consider the serious contradictions in the statements of Gulab Chand (PW-1) and Manni W/o Shri Balaram (PW-5), the star witnesses.