Back
2014 Supreme(HP) 1097
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rajiv Sharma, J.
Rajinder Singh Mehta - Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 205 of 2013
Decided On : September 08, 2014
For the appellant :Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Advocate.
For the respondent:Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma, Dy. Advocate General.
The judgment established the importance of witness testimonies, medical evidence, and FSL reports in proving culpability for fatal accidents. It also highlighted the legal implications of driving under the influence of alcohol as per Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Headnote:
Accused - Offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-AA IPC - Section 428 Cr.P.C. - FSL report Ext. PW-15/A - Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-accused was convicted for offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-AA IPC for causing a fatal accident due to rash and negligent driving. The prosecution's case was supported by witness testimonies and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of driving in a rash and negligent manner, causing the death of a student and injuries to others. The FSL report confirmed the presence of alcohol in the accused's blood and urine samples, indicating intoxication while driving.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the accused's culpability for the fatal accident, the reliability of the FSL report, and the interpretation of relevant sections of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on witness testimonies, medical evidence, and the FSL report to establish the accused's guilt. The interpretation of Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was crucial in determining the accused's state of intoxication while driving.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the accused's sentence was reduced from 7 years to 5 years under Section 304-AA of the IPC, considering his status as a first offender and the breadwinner of his family.
Rajiv Sharma, J.
This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 17.4.2013 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahar, H.P., rendered in Case No. 3-AR/7 of 2009/2013, whereby the appellant-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-AA IPC, was convicted and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 304-AA of the IPC. He was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month under Section 279 of IPC. He was also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days under Section 337 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The period of detention undergone by the accused was ordered to be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C.
2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 16.4.2009, after the classes were over, Priyanka Thakur alongwith her friends were waiting for bus at Dakolar near Shangrila Hotel by the side of National Highway No. 22. She was a resident of Village and Post Office Nirmand and taking coaching classes in Sigma Institute for PMT and AIEEE. At about 3:40 PM one white coloured Sumo Jeep came from Rampur side at very high speed and hit the students standing by the side of the road. She alongwith Sapna, Usha, Monika, Satish, Anu and Manjula received injuries and Nidhi received serious injuries. The Sumo Jeep after hitting the students hit the hill side on other side of the road. It was driven by the accused. All the injured including Priyanka Thakur, were taken to the hospital. Nidhi succumbed to the injuries on the spot. The police reached the spot at about 3:45 PM. The police recorded the statement of Priyanka Thakur under Section 154 Cr.P.C. She narrated to the police the manner in which the accident has taken place due to the rash and negligent driving of the accused. The FIR was registered. The post mortem of deceased Nidhi was conducted. The other injured were also medically examined at MGMSC Khaneri. The post mortem report was issued by the Medical Officer. The Tata Sumo jeep was taken into possession. The accused was arrested. His blood and urine samples were preserved and sent to FSL, Junga. The vehicle was mechanically inspected. The investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.
3. The prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses. The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused has denied the case of the prosecution in toto. According to him, he was innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. He has also examined one Raj Kumar as DW-1. The learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused, as stated hereinabove.
4. Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Advocate, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma, Dy. Advocate General, has supported the judgment of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P., dated 17.4.2013.
5. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and gone through the material available on record very carefully.
6. PW-1, Priyanka Thakur deposed that she was taking coaching for PMT examination in Sigma Institute at Dakolar. On 16.4.2009, she alongwith her friends was waiting for bus at Dakolar. At about 3:30 or 3:45 PM, one Sumo vehicle came from Rampur side in a high speed and ran over them causing injuries to her, Anu, Monika, Satish, Sapna, Usha and Manjula. The vehicle hit against the hill side of the road. Nidhi suffered s
