The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the application of this principle in the context of contradictory witness statements and lack of conclusive evidence.

Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J.

The present appeal is maintained by the appellant-State of Himachal Pradesh against the judgment of acquittal of accused in a case under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. I, Shimla (H.P) dated 7.12.2007, in Criminal Case No. 29/2 of 2005.

2. Briefly stating facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 7.1.2005, Ravinder Kumar (PW-2) was driving a bus bearing registration No.HP-07-3932 from Bus Stand Shimla to Mehli, whereas Ashok Kumar (PW-3) was conductor in the said bus. Around 8:40 PM, when the bus reached at Talland, Maruti Car coming from Khalini side in a high speed and collided with the aforesaid bus. The Maruti car in question was being driven by the accused in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety of others. As a result of which, he could not control the same and collided the same with the aforesaid bus. Accused was driving the car under the influence of liquor. Thereafter, the matter was reported to the police, where Investigating Officer recorded the statement of Ravi Kumar Ex.PW2/A, under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was sent to Police Station, vide FIR Ex.PW10/A was registered. Statement of the witnesses was also recorded and site plan was prepared. The vehicle in question was taken into possession by the police and photographs were taken.

3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as ten witnesses. Statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein he has denied the prosecution case and claimed innocence. No defence evidence was led by the accused.

4. Learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that the prosecution has proved the guilt of accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt, but the learned Court below on the basis of surmises and conjectures has acquitted the accused and the present is a fit case, where the accused is liable to be convicted after setting aside the judgment of acquittal.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused has argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and there is no occasion to interfere with the well reasoned judgment passed by the learned trial Court.

6. To appreciate the arguments of learned Deputy Advocate General and learned counsel for the accused, this Court has gone through the record in detail and minutely scrutinized the statements of the witnesses.

7. PW-1 Gopal Sharma, is a witness of memo Ex.PW1/A. PW-2 Ravinder Kumar, has deposed that he had not seen, which Maruti car collided with his bus. He had not noticed the registration number of Maruti Car and he could know about the registration number only at Police Station, Chhota Shimla. He has further deposed that he has not uttered a single word that driver of car was driving the said car in a state of intoxication. As per PW-2, he has neither noticed the registration number of Maruti Car nor he could identify the person, who was driving the Maruti Car. Similarly, as per PW-3, he has nowhere stated that accused was driving the Maruti car in a state of intoxication. From these statements, it is clear that accused was not driving the Maruti Car in a state of intoxication. Further, as per PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4, they specifically deposed that no injury was caused to any person. There is no iota of evidence on record as per the statements of PW-2 and PW-3 that Maruti car bearing registration No. HP-62-0299 was being driven by the accused. The statement of PW-2 does not inspire confidence, as he had not seen the registration number of Maruti car nor he was able to identify the accused. PW-5 Dharam Dutt, who had mechanically examined the accidental bus and Maruti Car and his reports are Ex.PW5/A and Ex.PW5/B. As per his