BIRBAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON September 4,1993 PW.1 Nahar Singh, a tea vendor, reported to the police officials at police station Galta Gate. Jaipur that the driver of the Rajasthan State Roadways Delux Bus No. RJ -14 P 3287 had knocked downtwo bicycle riders on Delhi -Jaipur bye -pass road near Khola Hanuman Ji Ka Mor causing injuries to one and death of the other. A case Under Sections 279, 337 and 304, IPC was registered. On investigation it was found that the applicant was the driver of the said vehicle at the relevant time and that by driving his said vehicle rashly and negligently on the public road as endangered the safety of others the applicant had knocked down the bicycle riders causing injuries to PW. 5 Sita Ram, aged 13 years, and death of the Veer Bhadra, also aged 13 years. A report Under Section 173, Cr.P.C. was accordingly submitted by the police against the applicant before the learned Magistrate. On being read and explained the substance of accusation for offences Under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A, IPC the applicant pleaded not guilty. On trial for those offences the learned Magistrate found him guilty of offences Under Sections 279 and 304A IPC. He convicted him, therefor, and sentenced him to S.I. for one month and fine of Rs. 100/ - Under Section 279 and S.I. for six months and fine of Rs. 200/ - for offence Under Section 304A, IPC. The applicant was acquitted of the offences Under Sections 337/338 IPC. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the order of the conviction and sentence and dismissed applicants appeal. Hence this application in revision Under Section 397, Cr.P.C.

(2.) MR . D.C. Sharma, the learned Counsel for the applicant vehemently urged that the lower Courts have mis -read and mis -appreciated the evidence on record inasmuch as there were material contradictions in the statements of PW. 1 Nahar Singh and PW. 5 Sita Ram on the point of the two boys having appeared on the road all of sudden. The learned Public Prosecutor, however, submitted that there were no good reasons for this Court to interfere with the concurrent findings of facts, as recorded by the two Courts below.

(3.) PW .1 Nahar Singh is the tea vendor who sells tea on his 'Thela' near the place of occurrence. He has stated that the two bicycle riders had come from the side -road of Hanuman Ji Ka Khola and when they were standing on the roadside with their bicycle the applicant brought his vehicle driving the same on wrong side and knocked down the two boys alongwith their bicycle, dragging them and their bicycle for about 30 paces under the wheel of the bus. PW 5 Sita Ram is the boy who was with the deceased Veer Bhadra on the bicycle at the relevant time. He has stated that on the day of the incident he and Veer Bhadra deceased, had gone to Hanuman Ji Ka Khola and while returning therefrom had stopped where the Khola Road joined the bye -pass road, he further stated that at that time the bus driver brought his bus and dashed the same against him and the deceased, Mr. Sharma pointed out that there was material contradiction between the statements of these two witnesses inasmuch as that whereas Nahar Singh stated that the boys were still riding the bicycle when the bus had dashed against them, Sita Ram stated that they were standing on the roadside. In my opinion this is no material contradiction in view of the fact that Nahar Singh's attention might have been diverted when the bus had dashed against the boys. Sita Ram is a boy of about thirteen years of age and in view of such age he could have suppressed or exaggerated some facts under the advice of his elders. Under such circumstances their testimony is required to be appreciated in the totality of the circumstances of the case and other evidence on record.