The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principle of strong benefit of doubt in favor of the accused when the defense is found to be highly probable and supported by independent witnesses.

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

This revision is against the concurrent finding of conviction.

2. In a criminal case arising out of FIR No.345 dated 09.07.2003 registered at Police Station Sadar Patiala, accused Ginder Singh (now petitioner) has been convicted by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala under Sections 304-A IPC vide judgment dated 04.11.2006. Vide a separate order of the even date, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and six months for committing the said offence besides fine of ?1,000/- with default sentence of two months (RI). Appeal filed by the petitioner against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence has been dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala on 07.07.2009. Hence this revision.

3. According to prosecution case, on 09.07.2003, Charanjit Kumar (PW1) & Ram Chand (PW2) were traveling on scooter No.PB-11V-2282; whereas their parents Rattan Kumar (deceased) and Kamlesh Kaur (deceased) were traveling on separate scooter No.PB-13D-2611, being driven by Rattan Kumar, on which Kamlesh Kaur was the pillion rider. Scooter of the deceased was ahead of scooter of Charanjit Kumar and Ram Chand. They were going towards Village Rajgarh. At about 03:30 PM, Rattan Kumar stopped the scooter near the turn of Village Rajgarh, when a PRTC bus of Barnala Depot bearing registration No.PB-11F-9763 came at a high speed from Patiala side and its driver dashed the bus against the scooter of Rattan Kumar. After collision, the bus dragged the scooter of father of complainant towards bushes standing on the right side of the road. Both Rattan Kumar as well as Kamlesh died at the spot and their scooter was damaged completely. Bus driver fled away from the spot. On the statement Ex.PA made by Charanjit Kumar, FIR was registered. Investigation was carried out. Rough site plan Ex.PE was prepared. Bodies were sent for post mortem examination. Accused was arrested and put to trial.

4. Accused was charge-sheeted under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined six witnesses including PW1 Charanjit Kumar and PW2 Ram Chand, eye witnesses of the occurrence, who supported the prosecution case. In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused controverted the incriminating circumstances appearing against him. According to the defence pleaded by him, the accused while driving bus No.PB-11F-9763, was coming from Patiala. As he reached near the turn of link road of Village Rajgarh, deceased Rattan Kumar suddenly turned the scooter towards link road of Rajgarh from the main road without any signal and without caring as to any vehicle was coming from behind. Accused tried his best to avoid the collision but could not immediately stop the bus by applying brakes abruptly and so bus hit the scooter. To support his defence, accused examined DW1 Gurmeet Singh and DW2 Munshi Ram, who were traveling in the bus. After hearing both the sides, trial court recorded conviction, which has been upheld by the Sessions Court, as mentioned earlier.

5. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that both the Courts below have misread the evidence and have taken erroneous view of convicting the accused on the basis of statements of witnesses and by not considering the defence of the accused, which was duly corroborated by the independent witnesses. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards site plan Ex.PE to show the location of the spot, where the scooter and the dead bodies fell after the collision along with the bus and the location where the complainant and his brother was standing. It is urged that as the bus was coming from the side of Patiala, so, in case it had hit the scooter of the deceased in the manner as stated by PW1 an PW2, the bus and scooter of the deceased could not have gone to the extreme right side in the bushes.

6. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has