In appeal against acquittal for rash driving causing death, uphold trial court's reasonable view based on photographic evidence and site plan showing truck on wrong side over eyewitnesses, unless patently perverse.

JUDGMENT :

RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.08.2013, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before the learned Trial Court) was acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (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 Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of the IPC. It was asserted that Punjab Singh (PW4) was a driver of the truck bearing registration No. HP-68-2292. Dinesh Kumar was a conductor in the truck. Informant Punjab Singh and Dinesh Kumar were coming from Mamun to McLeod Ganj in the truck. They reached Khajjian Bazaar at about 1:45 PM. A bus came from the opposite side. A motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-22-2392 was moving behind the bus at a high speed. The motorcyclists overtook the bus and hit the truck. The motorcyclist revealed his name as Sanjay Kumar. Sanjay Kumar and the pillion rider sustained injuries in the incident. The accident occurred because of the negligence of the motorcyclist. The injured were taken to the hospital. An intimation was given to the police. An entry (Ext.PW7/A) was recorded in the Police Station. HC Subhash Chand (PW12) and Constable Vijay Kumar were sent to verify the correctness of the information. HC Subhash Chand (PW12) filed an application (Ext.PW12/A) for seeking the opinion of the Medical Officer regarding the fitness of the injured to make the statements. The Medical Officer declared that the injured were not fit to make the statements. ASI Subhash Chand (PW12) went to the spot and recorded the statement of Punjab Singh (Ext.PW4/A) and sent it to the Police Station, where FIR (Ext.PW8/A) was registered. Subhash Chand investigated the matter. He prepared the site plan (Ext.PW12/B). He seized the truck bearing registration No. HP68-2292 and motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-22-2392 vide Memos (Ext. PW-1/A and Ext.PW5/A). Dr Shiv Darshan Singh (PW3) examined the injured Sanjay Kumar and Vinod Kumar and found that they had sustained grievous injuries which could have been caused within 2 hours of the examination. He issued the MLCs (Ext.PW3/A and Ext.PW3/B). Vinod Kumar succumbed to his injuries. An inquest on the dead body was conducted, and a report (Ext.PW12/C) was prepared. Dr B.M. Gupta (PW9) conducted the post-mortem examination and issued the report (Ext.PW9/A). According to his opinion, the cause of death was head injury, multiple fractures and a fracture of the right femur. HHC Narender Sood (PW10) examined the motorcycle and found that the motorcycle had no defect that could have led to the accident. He issued the report (Ext.PW10/A). The photographs of the spot (Ext.PW1 to Ext. P3 and Ext.P7 and Ext.P8) were taken.
The 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.

3. Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, notice of accusation was