LOHDYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition directed against the judgment of the Addl. Sessions Judge Dausa camp; Bandikui, dt. 14 -12 -1988 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trail court i.e, the Judicial Magistrate, Bandikui who convicted the petitioner for offence Under Section 304A, IPC and sentenced to four month's rigorous imprisonment.when this revision petition came up for hearing on 8 -3 -1989 it was found that the petition could be disposed of finally at this stage only as a short point was involved but on that day hearing was deferred for want of record. The case has been listed for hearing after the record has been received.

(2.) BRIEFIY stating the facts of this case are that one lalluram, Pw 1, gave a written report to the A.S.I. police station, Bandikui who arrived on the spot of accident on 5 -6 -80 at 1.30 a m He in turn sent it to the station house Officer, police station, Bandikui for registration of the case under Section 304A IPC According to this report on the previous night at about 8.00 P.M. a truck bearing registration No. RRL 8321 was carrying Stone load from karoli to Sikandra The stones were purchased by one Mithalal and truck was to be unloaded. Several persons including the complainant and deceased Gangaram boarded the empty truck which was stopped on the way because the labourers were to get down when they started getting down first of all Gangaram came down, but before he could be on the ground driver recklessly took the truck on reverse as a result of which it hit Gangaram who fell down and came under the right rear wheel of the truck. Gangaram was crushed to death and hence the aforesaid report was lodged. After completing the investigation a charge -sheet was submitted against the petitioner in the court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bandikui where the accused was read a statement of allegation constituting offence under Section 304A, IPC. In support of its case the prosecution examined 10 witnesses. The accused denied the allegations against him but the learned Magistrate after hearing the arguments convicted and sentenced the accused -petitioner as above. An unsuccessful appeal was filed before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Dausa Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence this revision petition has been filed Learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention towards the charge framed in the case which reads as under: .........[vernacular ommited text]........... The statement of the allegations was read over to the accused while recording the pleas. It was submitted that this was never the case of prosecution that the accused, while driving the vehicle rashly and negligently as mentioned in the charge, hit the deceased Gangaram and he died as a result of that. The prosecution case was that the passengers who were being carried in the truck Were asked to get down and while Gangaram was in process of getting down on the rear side the driver took the truck in reverse gear as a result of which Gangaram was hit from the back side of the truck and came under the wheel. It is submitted that at trial a new case has been made out that Gangaram bad already come on the road and while he was in process of taking down a cycle the truck was started as a result of which he lost the balance and fell under the wheel It is submitted that different witnesses of the prosecution have come with different stories, but all of them admit that it was the rear side of the truck which hit the deceased who fell under the wheel and died. It is submitted that the accused could not have seen as to who was standing behind the truck.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record.