1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment passed by learned Principal Sessions Judge Budgam in appeal no.03 titled Reyaz Ahmad Mir vs. State of J&K dated 7th of March 2006 as also against the judgment and order dated 8th July 2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Charari Sharief.

2. The petitioner has been convicted by the trial court under section 279 RPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 500/- has also been imposed. The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment under section 338. Sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. The trial court has also imposed fine of Rs. 10,000/- on the petitioner while convicting and sentencing him under section 429 RPC. The petitioner is aggrieved of the said judgment of the trial court dated 8th July 2005.

3. The appeal was filed against the judgment before the learned Principal Sessions Judge Budgam. The learned Principal Session Judge Budgam vide dated 7th March 2006 maintained the conviction of the petitioner but reduced sentence to a period of three months for commission of offence under section 279 RPC and has also imposed of Rs. 500/- as fine. The learned Sessions Judge Budgam further convicted and sentenced the petitioner under section 338 RPC and directed him to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of Rs. 500/- was also imposed. The petitioner was further directed to undergo six months imprisonment for commission of offence under section 429 RPC and fine of Rs. 10,000/- was also imposed on him. It was directed that the period of sentence will run concurrently.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner who is driver by profession was driving JKB-3454, vehicle Tata Matador. Police Post Pakher Pora received information that One Abdul Qayoom Teli, and his horse were hit by the vehicle which was driven by the petitioner/accused. The information was received by the Police post Pakar Pora on 2nd October 2002 and the case was registered in Police Station Charari Sharief under section 279/338/429 RPC.

5. The case was investigated and ultimately report under section 173 Cr.P.C was submitted to court of competent jurisdiction, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Charari Sharief.

6. The accused pleaded not guilty to the allegations/charges laid against him. The prosecution examined nine witnesses. The learned trial judge without elaborating and discussing the evidence in the impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the petitioner. In the appeal again, the learned Principal Session Judge has not referred to the evidence recorded during trial of the case and has upheld the conviction of the petitioner but has reduced the sentence which was imposed by the trial court.

7. Heard. Learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Ayoub argued that prosecution has miserably failed to prove guilt against the accused beyond shadow of reasonable doubt. He submitted that it is case of no evidence. The learned AAG, Mr. M.A. Rathore, was requested by court to show from evidence as to whether the charges made against the accused are proved. Mr. Rathore, AAG, referred to statement of two prosecuting witnesses Manzoor Ahmad Shah and Abdul Salam Dar. After reading the statements of these prosecuting witnesses the Ld. AAG fairly conceded that the statement of prosecution witnesses do not inculpate the accused. The two prosecution witnesses have stated that they reached scene of occurrence after accident had taken place. Prosecution witness Abdul Qayoom Teli who sustained injuries has deposed that while he was moving ahead of horse, he and horse were both hit by the vehicle and in consequence he sustained injuries on his lips, legs and his one tooth was broken. He has further deposed that horse died on spot. None of the prosecution witnesses have anywhere in their statement stated that the vehicle was either being driven rashly or negligently.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document