IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.
Jagir Singh - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent - Respondent
CRR-3305 of 2011 (O&M)
Decided On : 05-01-2023
Rash and Negligent Driving - Road Accident - Sections 279, 337, 304-A IPC - The court discussed the evidence and found the accused guilty of driving the tractor in a rash and negligent manner, causing the death of the victim. The court also referred to legal principles from State of Punjab v. Saurabh Bakshi and Jaswant Singh v. State of Punjab to justify the reduction of the sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was convicted for driving a tractor in a rash and negligent manner, causing the death of a person in a road accident. The prosecution presented evidence including witness testimonies, medical reports, and postmortem reports.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the petitioner guilty based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies and medical reports. The court also referred to legal principles from previous cases to justify the reduction of the sentence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was driving the tractor in a rash and negligent manner, leading to the death of the victim.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimonies of the witnesses, medical reports, and postmortem reports to establish the guilt of the petitioner. Additionally, the court referred to legal principles from previous cases to justify the reduction of the sentence.
Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed, and the sentence was modified to a period of 06 months under Section 304-A IPC, in line with the legal principles from previous cases.
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 16.12.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, vide which the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.11.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ambala Cantt., has been dismissed.
2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 16.05.2000, the complainant and his uncle's son namely Naresh Kumar son of Hukam Singh were going to Barara on motorcycle bearing registration No.HR01F-0276 Marka Yamaha. When they were near Subhari Bus Stand near Raj Model Farm then a tractor bearing registration No.HR07D-0756 was going ahead of them towards Barara, whose driver was driving it at a very fast speed and in a rash and negligent manner. When they reached near the Bus Stand of Raj Model Farm, Subhari and tried to cross the tractor at about 5.15 p.m., then the accused/petitioner turned his tractor towards the right side without any indication and the front tyre of the right side of the tractor struck the motorcycle of the complainant. The complainant fell down and Naresh Kumar struck a Sheesham tree due to the collision. Naresh Kumar received injuries on his head and other parts of the body. The complainant also received injuries. The accused fled away form the spot leaving his tractor on the spot. The accused was earlier known to the complainant. The complainant went to the Dera of Dev Raj and informed at his house at village Ugala on telephone regarding the accident. Naresh Kumar was taken to hospital at Shahabad in a Maruti Car but he succumbed to his injuries at Shahabad. Thereafter, he was brought to village Ugala at his residence.
On 16.05.2000, ASI Satbir Singh along with HC Sukhbir Singh, UGC Himmat Singh and C. Anoop Singh reached village Ugala after receiving a telephonic message from Hukam Singh, ex. Sarpanch, Ugala regarding the road accident. Thereafter, ASI Satbir Singh reached village Ugala and came to know that the dead body of Naresh Kumar was lying at the house of Hukam Singh, who had expired in a road accident. ASI Satbir Singh reached at the house of Hukam Singh and the complainant Tarsem Singh got recorded his statement Ex. PA. The Ruqa was sent through C. Anoop Singh, upon which, formal FIR EX.PW6/A was lodged on 16.05.2000 at 07.30 p.m.
During investigation, the mechanical report of the tractor bearing No.HR07D-0756 Ex. PW3/A and mechanical report of the motorcycle bearing No.HR01F-0276 EX.PW3/B were obtained. The postmortem report of Naresh Kumar Ex. PW7/A was also obtained. The tractor and the motorcycle were taken into police custody vide recovery memo Ex. PB. The MLR of the complainant-Tarsem Singh EX.PW5/A was obtained. The accused was arrested on 19.05.2000 and after completion of all other formalities of investigation, the challan was presented in the Court for trial.
3. On finding a prima face case, the accused was charge sheeted on 21.05.2001 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ambala Cantt under sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution in support of its examined the complainant/injured Tarsem Singh as PW1, Hukam Singh as PW2, HC Subhash Chander as PW3, Dr. Dev Raj as PW4, Dr. Arvinder Samar as PW5, ASI Karamveer as PW6, Dr. Suresh Sharma as PW7. Thereafter, evidence of the prosecution was closed by order of the Court on 24.04.2009.
5. When confronted with incriminating evidence against him, the accused in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. pleaded false implication and claimed innocence.
6. The complainant/injured Tarsem Singh while appearing as PW1 stated on oath in his examination-in-chief that on 16.05.2001, he and Naresh Kumar were going to Barara on a motorcycle bearing registration No.HR01F-0276 and that when they reached near Raj Model Farm, Subhari, then a tra
The main legal point established in the judgment is the culpability of the accused for driving in a rash and negligent manner, leading to the death of the victim, and the application of legal princip....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's reliance on eyewitness testimonies and material evidence to establish the accused's guilt for rash and negligent driving under Sections....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the concept of negligence in determining liability for rash and negligent driving, as well as the consideration of legal precede....
Revisional jurisdiction under CrPC Section 397 limited to patent errors/perversity, not re-appreciating evidence; driving on wrong side of road negligence causing accident, upheld conviction but redu....
Revisional jurisdiction limited; no interference with concurrent conviction for rash driving on wrong side causing deaths absent perversity, despite vehicle registration ambiguity, as eyewitnesses re....
Negligence in driving leading to fatality can be established without a test identification parade if the identity is corroborated by credible witnesses.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.