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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
State (GNGT of Delhi) – Appellant
Versus
Santosh Kumar – Respondent


Table of Content
1. prosecution case of negligence in driving. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. essentials for proving section 279 ipc. (Para 6 , 7)
3. appellate court's powers on acquittal. (Para 8 , 9)
4. prosecution failed to prove charges. (Para 10)

JUDGMENT

1. This appeal under Section 378(1) of the Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 12.07.2016 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (North-West), Rohini Courts, Delhi in connection with FIR No. 136/2010 PS Mangol Puri, Delhi for offence punishable under Sections 279/337/338 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution case in short is that on 13.03.2010 at about 12.30 AM, the respondent/accused was driving a vehicle (truck) bearing registration No. HR-38E-0194 on a public way rashly and negligently. The respondent/accused struck against one car bearing registration No. DL-1YB-7131 and caused simple and grievous injury to the passengers, namely, Antima Gupta and Shenam Jain. It is alleged that since the respondent/accused was driving the vehicle rashly and negligently so as to endanger the human life or to be likely to cause injury to other persons, FIR for offences punishable under Sections 279/337/338 IPC was registered ag

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top