2017 Supreme(HP) 596
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
State of Himachal Pradesh - Appellant
Versus
Ghanshyam - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 475 of 2008
Decided On : 07-07-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. R.S. Thakur
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala
The appellate court's balanced appreciation of the evidence led to the upholding of the acquittal.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Criminal Law - Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A of the IPC - The court discussed the evidence and the conduct of the investigating officer, and concluded that the findings of acquittal by the appellate court were based on a balanced appreciation of the evidence, and therefore upheld the acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a collision between two buses, resulting in the death of a passenger and injuries to others. The accused was charged under Sections 279, 337, 338, and 304-A of the IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellate court had properly evaluated the evidence and upheld the acquittal based on a balanced appreciation of the evidence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the findings of acquittal by the appellate court were justified based on the evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellate court's evaluation of the evidence was balanced and did not suffer from misappreciation, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of acquittal was maintained and affirmed.
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
The instant appeal stands directed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the judgment of acquittal rendered on 23.4.2008 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi upon criminal appeal No. 6 of 2005, whereby he set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded upon the accused/respondents herein, by the learned trial Court.
2. The facts relevant to decide the instant case are that on 10.7.1996 HRTC bus No. HP-33-1376 was enroute from Kullu to Chandigarh. PW-1 Ashok Kumar and PW-4, Prakash Chand were driver and conductor respectively of the H.R.T.C., bus No. HP-33-1376. At about 8 a.m., when the HRTC bus reached near SSB-A.O. Office Sundernagar, the speeding in-coming bus No. HP-31-1260 collided against rear portion of H.R.T.C. bus No. HP-33-1376 in bus No. HP-31-1260 being driven by the accused on wrong side of the road in a rash and negligent manner. Passenger Ram Dass, who was sitting on rear portion of H.R.T.C. bus, sustained injuries and he died on the spot, whereas other passengers sustained injuries in the accident. After the accident, the accused ran away from the spot. The information on telephone about the accident was given to police station, Sundernagar and ASI Mast Ram alongwith other police officials went to the spot. The ASI recorded statement of bus driver Ashok Kumar under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Consequently, FIR was registered against the accused person. The case was investigated by A.S.I. Mast Ram. The dead body of Ram Dass was sent to Civil Hospital, Sundernagar for postmortem examination. On completion of investigation, the SHO of Police Station, Sundernagar prepared the charge-sheet against the accused person and sent up the same to the trial Court. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate conducted the trial after framing charges and on conclusion of the trial, accused was convicted and sentenced.
3. On conclusion of the investigations, into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was prepared and filed before the learned trial Court.
4. The accused stood charged by the learned trial Court, for his committing offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the IPC. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by the learned trial Court, in which the accused claimed innocence and pleaded false implication in the case.
5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court, returned findings of acquittal upon the accused/respondent herein for his committing offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the IPC. In an appeal preferred therefrom by the accused/respondent herein before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, the latter reversed the apposite findings of conviction and sentence recorded in the judgment pronounced by the learned trial Court also he acquitted the accused of the offences charged.
6. The State of H.P. stands aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal recorded upon the accused/respondent. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation “by it” of the evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross-mis-appreciation “by it” of the material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal warranting reversal by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs standing replaced by findings of conviction.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the accused/ respondent herein has with considerable force and vigour, contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi standing based on a m