PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J.
Suresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
CRR-105-2008(O&M)
Decided on : 06-03-2025
JUDGMENT :
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.(Oral)
1. The present revision petition has been filed impugning the judgment dated 22.12.2007 passed by Sessions Judge, Karnal whereby the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17/22.03.2006 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal has been dismissed.
2. The FIR in the present case came to be registered on 27.07.1999. The judgment of conviction was passed on 17/22.03.2006 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. The Appeal filed against the order of conviction was dismissed on 22.12.2007 by the Sessions Judge, Karnal. The instant revision petition was filed on 21.01.2008 and has come up for final hearing now i.e. after a period of 25 years from the date of registration of the FIR.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.7.1999 Satbir Singh (PW3) and Krishan Lal (PW5) were going on their bi-cycles from their village Dhaman Kheri to their shop. Naresh Kumar son of Gulab Ram, was also paddling his bi-cycle ahead of them. At about 8.15 a.m., when they reached near Bajaj Market, Indri, near the bridge of drain of dirty water and started going towards Garhi Birbal road, then one bus no. HR-07-9082 of Haryana Roadways, Kurukshetra came from the side of Matak Majri. The driver of the bus was driving it at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner. It struck against the bi-cycle of Naresh Kumar. After causing the accident the driver of the bus left the bus at the spot and fled. Later on the name of the driver came to be known as Suresh Kumar son of Kailash Bhushan, resident of House No. 1439/16, Rishi Nagar, Karnal. As a result of the accident Naresh Kumar lost consciousness. Satbir Singh and Krishan Lal brought him to Govt. Hospital, Indri from where he was referred to Govt. Hospital, Karnal where he succumbed to his injuries. Head Constable Ram Parkash (PW2) received a ruqa Ex.P8 from Community Health Centre, Indri about the admission of Naresh Kumar. He reached Govt. Hospital, Karnal and obtained one ruqa Ex.PC. Satbir Singh met PW2 Head Constable Ram Parkash and he recorded his statement Ex.PD on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PE was registered by ASI Varinder Singh. Head Constable Ram Parkash inspected the dead body and prepared inquest report Ex.PG. An application was made for post-mortem examination on the dead body of Naresh Kumar. Head Constable Ram Parkash also prepared a rough site plan Ex.Pl of the scene of occurrence. PW7 Kadam Singh photographer was called and he took the snaps of the scene of accident. Bus HR-07-9082 of Haryana Roadways alongwith the damaged bi-cycle were taken into possession vide memo Ex.P5. On 28.7.1999, Suresh Kumar driver produced the registration certificate of the bus vide memo Ex.PK. One route duty certificate was also taken from the Duty Clerk of Haryana Roadways which was seized vide memo Ex.P2. The accused was arrested. After completion of the investigation and other usual formalities, the challan was presented in the court.
4. Charge for the offences punishable under sections 279/304A of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. The prosecution examined seven PWS in all namely PW1 Dr. Surinder Katyal, PW2 Ram Parkash Head Constable, PW3 Satbir Singh, PW4 Ishwar Singh, PW5 Krishan Lal, PW6 Gulaba and PW7 Kadam Singh, photographer. PW8 Head Constable Suresh Kumar and Prem Chand were given up as unnecessary.
6. In his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. the accused pleaded false implication. However, he did not lead any evidence in his defence.
7. Based on the evidence led, the accused/petitioner came to be convicted and sentenced by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal vide judgment and order of sentence dated 17/22.03.2006 as under:-
Offence under Section | Sentence | Fine | RI/SI in default of payment of fine |
Section 279 IPC | 03 Months | - | - |
Section 304-A IPC | 01 Year | - | - |
Both the aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrent
The judgment highlights that testimony inconsistencies and delay in trial can influence sentencing in criminal negligence cases.
Negligence in driving leading to fatality can be established without a test identification parade if the identity is corroborated by credible witnesses.
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....
In a prosecution for causing death by negligence under Section 304-A IPC, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was the driver of the vehicle and that their actions we....
The prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence proving the accused's rashness or negligence, leading to the overturning of convictions for death by negligence under sections of the IPC and Mot....
Negligence and rashness must be proven beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC; mere involvement in an accident does not equate to guilt.
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.