The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, and an acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence for the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Sushil Kukreja, J.

The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State (hereinafter referred to as “the appellant”) laying challenge to judgment, dated 30.06.2011, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (I), Kangra, District Kangra, H.P., whereby the accused/respondent (hereinafter referred to as “the accused”) was acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 279 & 337 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘ IPC ’).

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 19.12.2004 the accused was driving Bus (Jayanti Bus Services), bearing registration No. HP-36-5525, in which, Sanjay Kumar alongwith Sanjay Shukla was also travelling. When the bus reached near Nevia Hotel Gaggal, the accused started driving the same in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over the same while overtaking a Maruti Van, owing to which, the bus collided against the hill and got damaged from front side. In the aforesaid accident, Sanjay Kumar and other persons received injuries. The factum of the accident was informed to police, upon which, H.C. Som Raj, visited Sub Divisional Hospital Kangra and recorded the statement of injured Sanjay Kumar under Section 154 Cr. P.C. Consequently, FIR under Sections 279 & 337 of IPC was registered against the accused. The investigation was conducted by S.I. Prem Chand, who visited the spot, prepared spot map and photographed the spot. The Bus was impounded alongwith its documents and was got mechanically examined. On the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer found that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the accused. After completion of all the codal formalities, challan was presented against the accused in the learned trial Court.

3. On finding prima facie case against the accused, notice of accusation was put to him under Sections 279 & 337 of IPC, to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. In order to prove its case, during trial, the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses. After the close of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure wherein he stated that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case. However, he did not examine any witness in his defence.

5. The learned trial Court, vide judgment dated 30.06.2011, acquitted the accused for the offences under Sections 279 & 337 of IPC, hence, the present appeal by the State.

6. I have heard learned Additional Advocate General as well as learned vice counsel for the respondent/accused and have also gone through the record carefully.

7. The learned Additional Advocate General contended that the learned trial Court has not appreciated the evidence on record in its right perspective and has wrongly concluded that the accident took place due to mechanical failure.He further contended that the learned trial court has failed to appreciate the version of Sanjay Shukla and Sanjay Kumar, who were the passengers of the bus and had specifically levelled allegations of rash and negligent driving against the accused. With these submissions, he prayed for setting-aside the impugned judgment of the trial Court and acceptance of the instant appeal.

8. Per contra, learned vice counsel for the respondent/ accused contended that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused of the charges framed against him.

9. At the very outset, it needs to be observed that the Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the trial Court rendering acquittal as an order of acquittal adds up to the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused. In Dhanapal vs. State By Public Prosecutor, Madras , (2009) 10 SCC 401, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the presumption of innocence of the accused is strengthened by the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court. The rel