The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused's rash and negligent driving, leading to a fatal accident, constitutes criminal rashness and negligence under the Indian Penal Code, justifying the conviction and sentence.

JUDGMENT :

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

Petitioner herein is convict. He has been tried and convicted for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No. I, Amb, District Una H.P. in case No. 132-1/2001. Consequently, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under

Section 279 IPC, simple imprisonment for three months for the commission of offence punishable

under Section 337 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay Rs.5000/- fine under Section 304-A IPC. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Una in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2008 decided vide impugned judgment dated 22.8.2009 has upheld the findings of conviction and sentence recorded by learned trial Court.

2. The impugned judgment has been challenged on the grounds, inter-alia, that the photograph Ext.P12 has erroneously been relied upon while recording the findings of conviction for the reasons that both vehicles i.e. offending bus and ill fated car already removed from the spot. The statement of PW2 to this effect has been pressed in service. The evidence as has come on record by way of the testimony of PW1 to PW3 irrespective of self contradictory has been erroneously relied upon and rather misread and misappropriated also. The spot map having been prepared after removal of both vehicles on the spot could have also not been relied upon.

3. The facts giving rise for filing the present petition in a nut shell are that deceased Vijay Kumar accompanied by his wife Smt. Veena was away to Bhaderkali on 27.5.2001 in his Maruti car bearing No. HP-20A-3902. On way back around 1:00 P.M. while at Charood the car being driven by deceased Vijay Kumar in normal speed and in his own side was hit by the accused with offending bus bearing registration No. HP-38-3556 on account of driving the same in a rash and negligent manner. As a result thereof PW1 and her husband both suffered injuries on their person. Her husband got seriously injured in the accident. He scummed to the injuries received in the accident on the way to zonal hospital, Una.

4. Since the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving attributed to the accused-petitioner, therefore, the matter was reported to the police of police station, Amb. The information received qua the accident was reduced into writing vide rapat No. 14 Ext.PW11/B in the police diary. The police of police Station, Amb was also informed from Zonal Hospital, Una that the dead body of a person died in the accident has been brought to the hospital. Rapat Ext.PW11/C in this behalf was also entered in the rapat rojnamcha. The police swung into action. In the hospital PW1 Veena was got medically examined vide MLC Ext.PW4/A. Post Morten of the dead body was also got conduced vide post mortem report Ext.PW12/A. The statement Ext.PW1/A under Section 154 Cr.P.C. of PW1 was also recorded on the basis of which FIR Ext.PW11/A registered in the police station. The I.O. PW8 during the course of investigation has inspected the spot and prepared the site plan Ext.PW8/A. The photographs Ex.P7 to P12 of the place of accident with position of both vehicles were also taken. The photographs Ext.P1 to Ext.P3 are that of the dead body of deceased Vijay Kumar. The statements of witnesses were recorded as per their version.

5. On completion of the investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared and filed in the Court.

6. Learned trial Judge on appreciation of the final report and also the documents annexed therewith and on being satisfied that the accident has occurred on account of rash and negligent driving has proceeded to put notice of accusation under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. He, however, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. This has led the prosecution to produce the evidence comprising oral as well as documentary.

7. The material prosecution witnesses are Veena Kumari (PW1) one of the victim of th