The court affirmed that driving under the influence of alcohol constitutes negligence under the Motor Vehicles Act, supporting conviction despite minor discrepancies in witness statements.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 23.09.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District, at Nahan (learned Appellate Court) vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.01.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 181, 185 and 192A of the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act).

3. It was asserted that Virender Singh (PW7) was driving the truck bearing registration No. HP-17B-8238 on 21.09.2011 from Kala Amb to Dehradun. He reached near Katasan at about 10:20 PM. A vehicle bearing registration No. HP-71-1075 came from Paonta Sahib at a high speed and hit the rear tyre of the informant’s truck. The rear tyres were damaged due to the impact. Som Chand (PW6) and Anil Kumar (PW8) were also travelling in the informant’s truck. No person sustained any injury in the accident. Accused Kamal was driving the tipper bearing registration HP-71-1075, and the accident occurred because of the high speed of the tipper and the negligence of the accused. The tipper turned turtle after the accident, and the sand loaded in the tipper was spilled on the road. The matter was reported to the police, and entry (Ext.PW9/A) was recorded in the Police Station. HC Deep Chand (PW9) and Constable Chaman Lal were directed to visit the spot to verify the correctness of the entry. HC Deep Chand (PW9) visited the spot and recorded Virender Singh’s statement (Ext.PW7/A) and sent it to the Police Station, where FIR (Ext.PW5/A) was registered. HC Deep Chand (PW9) investigated the matter. He found that the accused was heavily intoxicated. HC Deep Chand (PW9) filed an application (Ext.PW9/B) for conducting the medical examination of the accused and obtaining his blood sample. Dr. Pankaj Gaur conducted the medical examination of the accused and found that he was unable to walk in a straight line, and he was having slurring of speech and a staggering gait. He obtained the blood sample of the accused and handed it over to the Police official accompanying the accused. He issued the MLC (Ext.PW10/A). HC Deep Chand (PW9) prepared the site plan (Ext.PW9/C). He took the photographs (Ext.P1 to Ext.P7) with the help of his mobile phone. He seized the vehicle along with the documents vide Memos (Ext. PW4/A and Ext.PW1/A). HHC Suresh Chand (PW2) examined the vehicles and found that there was no mechanical defect in them that could have led to the accident. He issued the reports (Ext.PW2/A and Ext.PW2/B). The accused could not produce his Driving Licence or the route permit on demand. The blood sample was sent to the SFSL, and as per the report of analysis, the quantity of alcohol in the blood of the accused was found to be 268.18 mg %. The final opinion was issued stating that the accused was under the influence of alcohol. Statements of witnesses were recorded as per their version and after the completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and presented before the learned Trial Court.

4. Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, the notice of accu