Acquittal in revision as driver and vehicle identity unproved: no initial registration details, color mismatch, absent test identification parade, unreliable dock identification by strangers, hearsay unsupported.

Judgment :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 11.09.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) vide which judgment of conviction dated 01.02.2010 and order of sentence dated 02.02.2010, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.II, Shimla. 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 revision are that the police presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that the informant, Shivali Sharma(PW-4), and her brother Ishan Sharma (PW-6) were returning from Dhalli after buying some articles on 3.12.2004 at about 5:30 p.m. A Santro Car came from the opposite side, overtook a Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC) bus at high speed, and hit Ishan (PW-6), who sustained injuries. The accident occurred due to the high speed of the car and the negligent overtaking of the HRTC bus. The matter was reported to the police. An entry No.20 (Ext.PW-11/A) was recorded in the Police Station. HC Surender Singh (PW-10) and Constable Ranjeet Singh (PW-11) were sent to the spot for verification. The informant, Shivali Sharma (PW-4), made a statement (Ext.PW-4/A), which was sent to the police station where an FIR (Ext.PW-9/A) was registered. The injured person was carried to the hospital. Dr.Ramesh Chand (PW-2) medically examined the injured and found that he had suffered injuries. He advised a dental examination. Dr Reeta Negi (PW-5) conducted the dental examination of the injured and found a fracture on the left lateral incisor, right lateral incisor and cervical end. She issued MLC (Ext.PW-5/A). Dr Ramesh Chand (PW-2) issued the final report stating that the injuries sustained by Ishan (PW-6) were grievous. He issued an MLC (Ext.PW-2/B). HCSurender Singh (PW-10) went to the spot. He prepared a site plan (Ext.PW-10/A), seized the vehicle vide seizure memo (Ext.PW-3/A) and recorded the statements of prosecution witnesses as per their version. After 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, a notice of accusation was put to him for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 201 of the IPC,to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses to prove its case. Jagdish Dutt (PW-1) is an eyewitness. Dr Ramesh Chand (PW-2) conducted the medical examination of the injured. Ajay Justa (PW-3) is the witness to recovery. Shivali Sharma (PW-4) is the informant. Dr Reeta Negi (PW-5) conducted the dental examination of the injured. Ishan Sharma (PW-6) is the injured. Mohit Sood (PW-7) did not support the prosecution’s case. Sanjay Chauhan (PW-8) is the witness to the recovery of the driving license. Inspector Sunil Negi (PW-9) prepared the challan. HC Surender Singh (PW-10) conducted the investigation. HHC Ranjeet Singh (PW-11) proved the entry in the daily diary.

5. The accused, in