2025 Supreme(HP) 1685

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Tapinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Cr. Revision No. 265 of 2014
Decided On : 10-12-2025

Revisional jurisdiction limited; no interference with concurrent conviction for rash driving on wrong side causing deaths absent perversity, despite vehicle registration ambiguity, as eyewitnesses reliable and negligence clear.

Headnote:(A) IPC Sections 279, 337 and 304-A - Rash and negligent driving - Tractor without registration plate driven at high speed on wrong side of road hitting children outside school gate causing death of two and injuries to others - Driver apprehended at spot - Conviction by trial and appellate courts upheld in revision - Ambiguity in registration number immaterial as vehicle had no plates - Mechanical inspection of different vehicle irrelevant absent claim of defect - Eyewitnesses identify driver in seat post-accident - Presumption of continuity applies - Driving on wrong side breaches road rules constituting negligence - Deterrent sentence warranted for such offences. (Paras 19-46, 48-51)

(B) CrPC Section 397 - Revisional jurisdiction - Limited to correcting patent defects, jurisdictional errors or law; no reappreciation of evidence or upsetting concurrent factual findings absent perversity - High Court not appellate court. (Paras 13-18)

(C) Evidence Act - Hostile witness - Testimony not discarded in toto; portions corroborating prosecution case acceptable if reliable - Indiscriminate declaration hostile deprecated. (Paras 36-38)

Facts of the case:
Tractor without registration plate approached school at high speed around 1:10 p.m., veered to wrong side hitting children waiting outside gate post school closure - Two died (one on spot, one en route hospital), others injured - Driver allegedly apprehended at spot - Prosecution proved via eyewitnesses, site plan showing skid marks and space on left, medical reports, no alcohol - Defence claimed different driver fled, substituted tractor - Concurrent conviction under Sections 279, 337, 304-A IPC with sentences of 6 months SI each for 279/337, 2 years for 304-A.

Findings of Court:
Accused driving tractor rashly on wrong side at high speed sole proximate cause of accident - Eyewitnesses reliable, defence witnesses unreliable - Conviction and sentence proper - No perversity warranting interference.

Issues: Whether accused was driver despite registration ambiguity and defence claim of substitution; proof of negligence; propriety of mechanical report; scope of revisional interference; adequacy of sentence.

Ratio Decidendi: Concurrent findings on identity and negligence supported by eyewitnesses, site plan, medical evidence not perverse - Revisional court interferes only on jurisdictional error or gross perversity - Wrong side driving negligence per road regulations - Hostile witness parts usable if corroborated - Spot apprehension negates need for identification parade - Sentences deterrent as required for rash driving deaths.

Result: Revision petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. high-speed unregistered tractor hit children causing deaths. (Para 1 , 2)
2. trial featured prosecution witnesses and accused denial. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. lower courts convicted for rash negligent driving. (Para 6 , 7)
4. parties dispute tractor registration and driver identity. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
5. revisional jurisdiction limits interference absent perversity. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
6. witnesses confirm tractor had no registration plate. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
7. wrong tractor mechanical report irrelevant sans defect. (Para 22 , 26)
8. seizure and ownership ambiguity unproven prosecution doubt. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 27 , 28)
9. defence witnesses rejected for unreliability inconsistencies. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
10. eyewitnesses place accused in driving seat. (Para 33 , 34 , 35)
11. corroborated hostile witness testimony admissible. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)
12. wrong-side driving breaches rules constitutes negligence. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44)
13. post-mortems confirm accident caused fatalities injuries. (Para 45 , 46)
14. deterrent imprisonment mandated for fatal rash driving. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51)
15. revision dismissed upholding conviction sentence. (Para 52 , 53 , 54)

JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.

1. The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 01.08.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simrour District at Nahan, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) vide which judgment of conviction dated 29.10.2009 and order of sentence dated 31.10.2009, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. I, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, 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 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that informant Kamlesh Sharma (PW-1) was the Principal of National Public School Sataun. The school closed for pre-nursery and KG at 1:00 p.m. The children were standing outside the gate on 20.09.2002 with Sunita Devi (PW-2). The informant Kamlesh Sharma (PW-1) was also standing on the staircase. Ram Parkash (PW-4), Shyam Lal, Kamlesh Kapoor, etc., had visited the school to take their children. A tractor having no registration plate came towards the school at a high speed at around 1:10 p.m. The tractor went towards the wrong side of the road and hit Rohit Thakur, Pragya Tomar, Neha Thakur and Sanjana Tomar, who sustained injuries. Rohit Thakur died on the spot, and Pragya Tomar succumbed to her injury on the way to the hospital. Tapender Singh (accused) was driving the tractor at the time of the accident. The accident occurred due to his negligence and the high speed of the tractor. Intimation was given to the police. An entry was recorded in the Police Station. ASI Balak Ram (PW-15) went to the spot for the verification of the information. Kamlesh Sharma (PW-1) made a statement (Ext.PW-1/A), which was sent to the Police Station where F.I.R. (Ext.PW-15/B) was registered. SI Balak Ram (PW-15) investigated the matter. He prepared the site plan (Ext.PW-15/D) and seized the tractor and the trolley vide memo (Ext.PW-1/B). Jai Chand (PW-8) took the photographs of the spot (Exts.P1 to P4) whose negatives are Exts.P5 to P8. Inquests on the dead bodies of Rohit Thakur and Pragya Tomar were conducted, and the reports (Ext.PW-15/E and Ext.PW-15/F) were prepared. Dr S.N. Sachhan (PW-10) conducted the post-mortem of Pragya Tomar and found that she had died due to a ruptured spleen, which could have been caused in a motor vehicle accident. He issued a report (Ext.PW-10/A). Dr S.N. Sachhan (PW-10) also conducted the post-mortem of Rohit Thakur and found that he had died due to a head injury, causing complete

Click Here to Read the rest of this document