SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J.
Shivani Sharma - Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.Rev.P. 1005 of 2018
Decided On : 08-04-2021




The scope of revision under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. is limited; courts cannot interfere with factual findings unless there is a manifest error or gross miscarriage of justice.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 397, 401, and 360 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 279 and 304A - Appeal against conviction - The petitioner was convicted for rash driving resulting in death - The courts upheld the conviction and sentence after thorough examination of evidence - It was determined that the evidence of the main witness was credible, and the petitioner was driving negligently. The High Court does not substitute its findings for those of lower courts unless there is a manifest error - The benefit of probation was granted considering mitigating circumstances. (Paras 1, 4, 5, and 9)

(B) Probation - Factors for consideration in granting probation include the nature of the offence and the personal circumstances of the convict. (Para 9)

Table of Content
1. negligent driving leading to death (Para 2)
2. scope of revision under cr.p.c. (Para 3)
3. appellate evaluation of evidence (Para 4 , 5)
4. basis for probation consideration (Para 7 , 8)
5. granting probation and passport renewal (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. (ORAL)--The present petition under Section 397 /401 Cr.P.C is directed against the order dated 16.11.2018, passed by the Additional Session Judge-05, Saket Courts, Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 407/2017, wherein the learned Additional Session Judge upheld the order of conviction dated 19.07.2017 and order on sentence dated 19.09.2017 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-04, South East District, Saket.

2. The facts, in brief, leading to the instant revision petition are as under:

a) It is the case of the prosecution that on 13.08.2013, at about 1:00 PM, at Shahid Surya Sain Marg, Near Gate No. 8, Mandakini Enclave, New Delhi, the petitioner herein (accused), who was driving a Wagon-R car bearing registration No.DL-3CT-4641 in rash and negligent manner, hit a pedestrian, one Govind Gautam, causing his death.

b) After completion of investigation, Charge-sheet was filed stating that there is enough material to proceed ahead with the case against the petitioner herein for offences under Sections 279 and 304A IPC. Charges were framed against the petitioner to which the petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

c) The prosecution examined 6 witnesses.

    i. PW-1, Dr. Kalim Ahmed Khan, Chief Medical Officer, Hakeem Adbul Hameed Centenary (HAHC) Hospital, was examined to prove the MLC bearing No.1029/13. He deposed that the patient was unfit for statement and was unconscious. He also deposed that the patient was brought by one person named Sonu (PW-5) and the injuries were caused in a road accident.

    ii. PW-2, Head Constable Ram Singh, is the main witness of the case. He deposed that on 13.08.2013, he was on patrolling duty near Mandakini Enclave and at about 1:00 PM one Wagon-R car, which was coming from Alakhnanda towards CR Park hit a person who was going from Alakhnanda side towards CR Park. He deposed that the car hit the person from behind and thereafter it hit the electricity pole. He deposed that the injured person was taken to the hospital in TSR (Auto). He further deposed that the above said car was being driven by one lady. He further deposed that he informed the duty officer regarding the accident and SI Laxmi Chand (PW-6) came to the spot. He deposed that the car and the petitioner were handed over to SI Laxmi Chand. PW-2 also deposed that the victim was not walking on the footpath but on the road and the vehicle came from behind and hit the victim. He also stated that the road was not crowded.

    iii. One Buddh Ratan was examined as PW-3. He deposed that on the fateful day he was standing at a Petrol Pump in front of Jahapanah Club, Kalka Public School Road, Alaknanda and was getting the petrol tank of his bike filled. He deposed that he heard a loud noise of application of brakes of vehicle and public started gathering on the spot and he also went to the spot to see as to what had happened. He deposed that he saw a man lying there in a pool of blood and nobody was picking him up. He deposed that he requested the people there but no one helped him. Thereafter a young boy came there and helped him to take the victim to the Hospital. He deposed that they took the victim to Majidia Hospital in an auto and later the victim was referred to Batra Hospital. He stated that he had not seen the accused/petitioner herein.

    iv. PW-4 is Head Constable Sarnam Singh. He deposed that on receiving information of accident he reached the spot and he met PW-2. The Wagon-R car bearing registration No.DL- 3CT-4641 was found at the spot. The petitioner was there near the car. He deposed that PW-6 arrested the petitioner. Site plan was prepared. He also deposed that the passerbies were questioned.

    v. PW-5, Sonu Upadhyay deposed th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top