(Sanjay Karol, J.) (Oral) - The present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 10th January, 2001 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Kasauli at Solan in case No. 102/2 of 1996 titled as State v. Balak Ram acquitting the accused of the charged offence under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.As per the case of the prosecution, on 28th January, 1996 at about 11.30 a.m. vehicle No. HP-14-1457 being driven by Raj Kumar (PW-5) was on its way from Solan towards Barog. After reaching at a place known as Doridiwal (Near Congress Bhavan, Solan), bus bearing No. HP-14-3537 being driven by accused at a high speed came and hit the vehicle driven by Raj Kumar (PW-5). The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the accused as a result of which passengers suffered injuries. The matter was reported with the Police by Shri Bhag Chand (PW-9), Cleaner of the bus driven by PW-5. His statement (Ext.PW-9/A) under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Police. Based on the same, FIR No. 13/96 (Ext.PW-8/A) was registered with Police Station, Solan under Sections 279 and 337 I.P.C. The police machinery was set into motion and Kulwant Singh (PW-11) carried out the investigation. The photographs Ext.P-1 to Ext.P-4 were taken by Ashok Kumar (PW-4). The vehicles in question were impounded and the mechanical report Ext.PW-11/C was obtained. Injured Raj Kumar (PW-5), Smt. Madhu (PW-6) and Kulwant Singh (PW-11) were got medically examined through Dr. S.K. Aggarwal (PW-3) and Dr. Pradeep Sood (PW-7). Medical report of Sunil is Ext.PW-3/A, Raj Kumar (PW-5) is Ext.PW-3/B, Madhu (PW-6) is Ext.-3/C) and Kulwant Singh (PW-11) is Ext.PW-7/A. Spot map (Ext.PW-11/A) was also prepared at the spot. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

3.With completion of the investigation, the challan was presented in the Court for trial. The notice of accusation under Sections 279, 337 and 338 I.P.C. was put to the accused to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.

4.In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses. The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded. No evidence was led by the accused.

5.Considering the material on record, the court below acquitted the accused of the charged offence on the ground that the prosecution story appeared to be false. The version of the witnesses was contrary to the record and the police authorities had not carried out the investigation at the spot and in accordance with the provisions of law. The accused was held not to have committed the charged offence.

6.I have considered the record and heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

7.The guilt of the accused has to be ascertained from the statements of the witnesses which needs to be examined. Out of 14 witnesses the testimony of the spot witnesses namely, Raj Kumar (PW-5), Madhu (PW-6), Bhag Singh (PW-9) and Kulwant Singh (PW-11) who carried out the investigation is material.

8.Kanshi Ram (PW-1) has simply deposed about the recovery of the offending bus No. HP-14-3537 in terms of seizure memo Ext.PW-1/A. Krishan Dutt (PW-2) has deposed with regard to the receipt of information of the accident and lodging of the report Ext.PW-2/A.

9.Dr. S.K. Aggarwal (PW-3) and Dr. Pradeep Sood (PW-7) have examined the passengers who were travelling in the bus driven by PW-5. PW-3 examined Sh.Sunil as per M.L.C. (Ext.PW-3/A), PW-5 as per M.L.C. (Ext.PW-3/B), Smt. Madhu (PW-6) as per M.L.C. (Ext.PW-3/C), Shri Balak Ram as per M.L.C. report (Ext.PW-3/D) and Sh. Diwan Chand (PW-12) in terms of his M.L.C. report (Ext.PW-7/A). From the medical reports and the certificates, it is clear that the passengers including the witnesses had sustained injuries as a result of the accident in question.

10.Shri Ram (PW-8) has registered the F.I.R. (Ext.PW-8/A) and Ranjeet Singh (PW-10) is the police official, who has partly investigated the m