Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Suresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
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-
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.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
