Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
Vinod Kumar Dogra - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. Revision No. 4054 of 2013
Decided On : 12-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. negligent high-speed driving caused pedestrian death (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial featured eyewitnesses and accused denial (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. lower courts upheld negligence conviction concurrent (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. petitioner contests driving proof and probation (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. state defends concurrent guilt findings (Para 11) |
| 6. revisional jurisdiction limited absent perversity (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. unchallenged testimony proves accused drove vehicle (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 8. witnesses cannot opine on driver negligence (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 9. wrong-side driving constitutes rash negligence (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 10. buffalo-hit defence version unproved (Para 29 , 30) |
| 11. section 313 denial not defence evidence (Para 31 , 32) |
| 12. crushing injuries prove culpable homicide (Para 33 , 34) |
| 13. admitted mlc admissible sans formal proof (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 14. excess alcohol violates mv act 185 (Para 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 15. uninsured vehicle violates mv act 196 (Para 43) |
| 16. no probation for 304a ipc offences (Para 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 17. sentence upheld revision dismissed (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 20.06.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. ( learned Appellate Court) vide which the judgment of conviction dated 26.12.2012 and order of sentence dated 28.12.2012, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. (3), Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, 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 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 184, 185 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V. Act). It was asserted that on 28th October 2003 at about 7:15 PM, the informant, Madan Lal (PW1), was going towards Dina Nath (since deceased), who was collecting the grit stones in front of his house. A Maruti car bearing registration number HP-23-0437 came to the spot at a high speed from Ghumarwin and hit Dinanath towards the wrong side of the road. Dinanath was trapped under the vehicle and was dragged for a distance of about 5–6 feet. The driver identified himself as Vinod Kumar Dogra (the accused). Dinanath succumbed to his injuries on the spot. The accident occurred due to the negligence of the accused. ASI Mulk Raj (PW-6) recorded the statement (Ext.PW-1/A) of informed Madan Lal (PW-1), which was sent to the Police Station, where F.I.R. (Ext.PW-6/A) was registered. Balwant Singh (PW7) took the photographs of the spot (Ext. PW7/A to Ext. PW-7/E). HC Mulkh Raj prepared the site plan (Ext. PW6/C). He conducted the inquest on the dead body and prepared the inquest report (Ext. PW6/D). Dr Anil Kumar (PW8) conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased and found that the deceased, Dinanath, had sustained multiple injuries which could have been caused in a motor vehicle accident. The cause of death was haemothorax leading to cardiopulmonary shock. He issued the post-mortem report (Ext. PW8/A). ASI Mulkh Raj seized the vehicle bearing registration no. HP-23-0437, Registration Certificate, insurance certificate, and driving license vide memo (Ext.PW-1/B). HHC Dev Raj (PW-5) conducted the mechanical examination of the car and found that there were no mechanical defects in the vehicle, which could have led to the accident. He issued a report (Ext.PW-5/A). ASI Mulkh Raj arrested the accused, who was medically examined. It was found that the accused was intoxicated. MLC (Ext. PA) was issued. The blood sample of the accused was preserved and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga and the report of analysis (Ext. PB) was issued stati
Revisional court upholds concurrent convictions for rash driving, drunk driving causing death where evidence shows wrong-side driving, high intoxication, absent perversity; limits interference to jur....
Negligence in driving leading to injury constitutes a violation under Sections 279 and 337 IPC, affirming strict liability for road traffic offenses.
Revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors or perversity; no re-appreciation of evidence; overtaking on wrong side while ignoring oncoming traffic constitutes rash negligence justifying convict....
The court reaffirmed that driving under the influence leading to accident constitutes negligence, with the burden on the accused to explain circumstances of the incident.
Revisional jurisdiction confines to patent defects or perversity, not reappreciating evidence; concurrent findings on driver's identity and negligence in reversing without safety check upheld, sustai....
Negligence while driving under intoxication resulting in damage to property is a valid ground for conviction under criminal law, demonstrating the importance of maintaining road safety standards.
Revisional jurisdiction under CrPC limits High Court to correcting patent defects or perversity; cannot reappreciate evidence to upset concurrent conviction absent jurisdictional error or miscarriage....
Revisional court cannot reappreciate evidence to upset concurrent convictions under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 absent perversity; driving on wrong side of narrow curve without precautions constitutes....
Revisional court acquits of rash driving/death charges where site plan shows victim vehicle on wrong side, speed unquantified, negligence opinions inadmissible; upholds conviction for fleeing without....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
