Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Anoop Chitkara, J.
State of Himachal Pradesh - Appellant
Versus
Subhash Chand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 295 of 2009
Decided On : 22-07-2021
Acquittal - Rash and Negligent Act - Sections 279, 304-A of IPC and 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act - The court discussed the evidence presented by the prosecution and the statements of witnesses to determine the responsibility of the accused in the accident. The judgment highlighted the lack of conclusive evidence to prove the accused's rash and negligent act, leading to the acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution appealed the acquittal of the accused for causing death due to a rash and negligent act on a public road. The victim, a girl, was hit by a tempo and declared dead upon arrival at the hospital. The accused claimed that the accident occurred when the girl suddenly came into the middle of the road.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution's evidence was not convincing enough to prove the accused's rash and negligent act. Discrepancies in the statements of witnesses and lack of conclusive proof led to the acquittal of the accused.
Issues: The key issue was whether the accused was responsible for the accident due to rash and negligent driving.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of conclusive evidence to establish the accused's responsibility for the accident. Discrepancies in witness statements and the plausibility of the accused's claim led to the acquittal.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal of the accused was upheld.
JUDGMENT :
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Challenging the acquittal of respondent/accused for causing death due to rash and negligent act on a public road, the State has come up before this Court by filing appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.PC.
2. On 17.3.2007 Medical Officer of Sub Divisional Hospital, Palampur informed the Police Station that a girl has been brought to the hospital, who had received injuries in an accident but when she was brought to the hospital she was already dead. The said information was recorded in Daily Diary, Ext. PW4/A, and Investigator proceeded towards the hospital.
3. The Investigator recorded the statement of Om Prakash (PW1) father of the victim that Kumari Sakshi was his daughter. He stated that he runs a Tea Shop at Thakurdwara. On 17.3.2007 at around 8:30 in the morning, his daughter had visited his shop along with her grandfather, Jaisi Ram, (PW3). When she was returning her home along with her grandfather and was crossing the road, then a Tempo came from Palampur side in a very fast speed and hit his daughter. The vehicle ran over his daughter and fled away. Despite their raising noise, the driver did not stop his vehicle. After that he along with his father ran towards the spot, carried his daughter and brought her to the hospital. On examination, the doctor declared his daughter ‘brought dead’. The informant also stated that he has inquired at his own level and came to know that the name of the driver was Subhash Chand and number of his vehicle was HR-37-3295. This information was recorded in Rukka, Ext. PW5/A, which led to registration of FIR captioned above. The police got conducted the postmortem examination, Ext. PB, and the cause of death was declared ‘due to accident’. The police arrested the accused and conducted further investigation and seized tempo. After completion of investigation, the police filed report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C.
4. Vide order dated 29.11.2007, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Palampur issued ‘Notice of Accusation’ to the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A of IPC and 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
5. The prosecution examined father of the deceased, Om Prakash, as (PW1), a passerby Sh. Jagdish Raj as PW2 and Sh. Jaisi Ram, grandfather of the deceased as PW3. The prosecution had also examined Mechanic and Investigating Officer.
6. In statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.PC accused admitted that he was driving his tempo on 17.3.2007 at 8:30 am at Thakurdwara and also admitted that his vehicle was involved with the accident but he stated that he was not driving his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, in fact, a girl suddenly came in the middle of the road, which led to accident. Accused did not lead any evidence in defence.
7. Vide judgment mentioned above, learned trial court did not find the evidence of the prosecution as convincing and dismissed the prosecution, thereby acquitted the accused by discharging him of the aforesaid offences.
8. Challenging the acquittal, the State came up before this court by filing an appeal under Section 378 (3) of Cr.PC.
ANALYSES AND REASONING.
9. As per the earliest report mentioned in the statement recorded under section 154 Cr.PC i.e. Ext. PW1/A father of the victim, Om Prakash (PW1), had explicitly stated the following facts:
(b) That his daughter was crossing the road along with his father;
(c) That suddenly a tempo came in a high speed and hit his daughter and it ran over her;
(d) That he along with his father run towards the spot and lifted his daughter and carried her to the hospital; and
(e) The accused did not stop the vehicle and fled away.
10. In the statement recored on oath (PW1) stated that after hitting his daughter the tempo stopped at a distance of 50 feet. In the cross examination he admitted that he did not notice the tempo hitting his daughter, thus
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
