State of Himachal Pradesh vs Piar Chand

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(HP) 451

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Piar Chand – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for appellant-State.
For the Respondent:Mr. Sat Parkash, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Instant criminal appeal filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to impugned judgment dated 24.02.2011 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kangra, H.P. in Criminal Challan No.35-II/06 under Sections 279, 337 & 304-A of Indian Penal Code, whereby learned Court below acquitted the respondent- accused (hereinafter ‘accused’) for his having allegedly committed the offence punishable under , 337 & 304-A of Indian Penal Code.

2. Precisely, the grouse of the appellant/State, as has been highlighted in the grounds of appeal and further canvassed by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, is that learned Court below has failed to appreciate the evidence in its right perspective, as a result thereof, findings contrary to the record have come to the fore. While making this Court peruse statement of PW-2 Surinder @ Chhinda, Mr. Chauhan, submitted that prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that accident occurred on account of rash and negligent act of the accused, who otherwise after having hit the scooter on which the complainant and the deceased were travelling, fled away from the spot. He further submi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document