Back
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
BHAWANI SINGH
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Appellant
Versus
RAM CHANDER - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1986
Decided On : 05/02/1989
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - SECTIONS 117, 3/112 - INDIAN PENAL CODE - SECTIONS 279, 337 - RASH AND NEGLIGENT DRIVING - ACCIDENT CAUSED BY DRUNK DRIVER - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, a bus driver, was involved in an accident that resulted in injuries to the occupants of two jeeps. The prosecution alleged that the accused was driving rashly and negligently, and that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused was driving rashly and negligently, and that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident. The court also found that the accident was caused by the accused's rash and negligent driving.
Issues: Whether the accused was driving rashly and negligently.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused was driving rashly and negligently, and that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident. The court also held that the accident was caused by the accused's rash and negligent driving.
Final Decision: The court convicted the accused of offences under sections 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 117 and 3/112 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The accused was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500 under section 337, I. P. C., Rs. 1,000 under section 279, I. P. C., Rs. 2,000 under section 117 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and Rs. 100 for the offence under section 3/112 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Bhawani Singh, J.—This appeal, by the State, arises out of the judgment of acquittal by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (II), Simla, in case No. 174/2 of 1983 decided on 31-12-1985. It relates to an offence under section 279/ 337,1. P. C. read with section 117 and 3/112 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The brief facts of the case are that on 17-8-1985 the police reached at the place of accident near the Victory Tunnel and found that Jeep No. HIS-4806 and Jeep No. HIM 2765 were going towards Victory Tunnel. From the opposite side bus bearing No HIL-5266 came, driven by the accused, in a rash and negligent manner collided with Jeep No. HIM-2765 and Jeep No. HIS-4806. This collision caused injuries to Fadam Singh driver of one of the Jeeps, besides Sh. Roop Singh Dogra, Chief Engineer, Electricity Board, Simla (PW 2).
2. The accused Ram Chander was medically examined and it was found that he had taken alcohol. After investigation, challan under the aforesaid sections was initiated.
3. The accused denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined thirteen witnesses and the accused also examined witnesses in defence besides his statement under section 313, Cr. P. C. He admitted the accident but attributed the same to the rash and negligent driving by the drivers of these two jeeps. Besides this he alleged that the steering of his bus went out of order. The trial ended in the acquittal of the accused. The State assails this judgment by way of this appeal. The accused has been served as per office report but he has not appeared. I, therefore, proceed to decide this matter.
4. Sh. M. S. Guleria, Asstt. Advocate General, submits that the offence has been proved against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. He asserts that the trial court judgment based on certain minor contradictions is not legally sustainable. Therefore, he urges that looking to the clear, cogent and convincing evidence on the record, the judgment under appeal deserves to be set aside and the accused punished for the commission of these offences.
5. Sh. Roop Singh Dogra (PW 2) who is Chief Engineer Electricity Board, Simla was one of the occupants of the jeep. He states that S/Sh. C. M. Walia and C. L. Gupta, both Assistant Engineers, were sitting with him in the jeep while he was going to his house. He further states that when they were 100-150 feet away from the Victory Tunnel, a Himachal Road Transport Corporation Bus which had H1L registration number came with great speed. Seeing this the driver of their jeep stopped but the bus hit their jeep from the back portion which created great impact. Due to this their jeep hit another jeep. He sustained injury and blood started coming on to his forehead. He was taken to the hospital in a car. He states that this accident took place due to the rashness of the driver who was not driving the vehicle in a normal way. He denied the suggestion that the speed of the vehicle was 20-25 Kilometers per hour or that the driver was not driving the bus at great speed. The other witnesses to support the rash driving by the accused are Sh. C. L. Gupta, Assistant Engineer (PW 3), Sh. C M. Walia, Assistant Engineer (PW 4), Ajay Grover (PW 6). Sh. Diwakar Sharma (PW 7) and Sh. Nathu Ram (PW 10). All these witnesses have categorically stated about the rash and negligent act of the accused. PW 10 Sh. Nathu Ram has gone to the extent of stating that the way the driver was driving his bus it appeared that he had taken liquor. All these witnesses are well placed officers and there is no reason to doubt their testimony.
6. Sh. Puran Chand Mechanic (PW It) has stated that he examined all the three vehicles on 17-8-1983, that is, Bus HIL 2256 and the jeeps. He gave his report of inspection (Ex. PW 11/A) to the Police at the spot. In cross-examination he states that on examination he found that the steering of the bus was not in working order and that in case a vehicle develops this defect, there is possibility of the vehicle going
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
