CRL.REV.P. 348/2009

Page 1

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 03^rd August, 2023

Decided on: 11^th August, 2023

+

CRL.REV.P. 348/2009

ROHTAS

..... Petitioner

Through: Mr. Sudarshan Rajan and

Mr.

Ramesh

Rawat,

Advocates.

V

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the

State with SI Dhananjay

Dubey, P.S. Krishna Nagar.

CORAM:

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

JUDGMENT

1.

The petitioner was put to trial arising out of FIR bearing no

33/03 registered at police station Krishna Nagar under sections

279/304A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as

“IPC”) on allegations that the petitioner on 03.02.2003 at 6.10 pm at

road no 57 opposite Swaran Cinema, Delhi within the jurisdiction of

PS Krishna Nagar was found driving the vehicle bearing registration

no.DL-1PB-0717 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger

Digitally Signed

By:NIDHI

Signing Date:22.08.2023

12:28:31

Signature Not Verified

CRL.REV.P. 348/2009

Page 2

the human life and personal safety of others and while doing so hit

against Mukut Lal when he was crossing road and caused his death

not amounting to culpable homicide. The petitioner was given notice

under section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(hereinafter referred to as “the code”) to which the petitioner pleaded

not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined seven witness

including eye witness Girish Kumar as PW1. The Statement of

accused was recorded under section 313 of the Code wherein the

appellant pleaded innocence and false implication but did not lead

defence evidence. The Court of Sh. Raj Kumar, Metropolitan

Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as

“the trial court”) vide judgment dated 22.11.2007 convicted the

petitioner for offences punishable under section 279/304A IPC

primarily relying on testimony of eye witness Girish Kumar. The

relevant part of the impugned judgment is reproduced verbatim as

under:-

8. In order to prove that the accused was driving the vehicle

on the date, time and place, the most prominent, star

witness and the eye witness of the incident is PW1 Girish

Kumar who has categorically submitted that on 3.2.2003 he

alongwith his father were coming from Tis Hazari courts in

the bus in question and accused present in the court on that

Digitally Signed

By:NIDHI

Signing Date:22.08.2023

12:28:31

Signature Not Verified

CRL.REV.P. 348/2009

Page 3

day was driving the bus in a rash and negligent manner.

PW1 has categorically further submitted that at about 6.10

p.m. When the bus reached opposite Swaran Cinema bus

stop, he alongwith his father were in the process of getting

down from the bus, the accused shouted "Jaldi Utro Jaldi

Utro". His father boarded down from the bus and when he

was crossing the road in front of the bus, the accused

started the bus in a rash and negligent manner as a result

of which the accused hit his father and his father fell down

from the bus, the blood started oozing out from the body of

the victim and he was taken to Sri Ram Hospital where the

doctor declared the victim as brought dead. PW1 has

proved in his statement on record as PW1/A, the seizure

memo of the bus as Ex.PWI/B, the seizure memo of the

driving licence as Ex.PWI/C, personal search memo of the

accused as Ex.PWI/D, the arrest memo as Ex.PWI/E,

identification of the dead body as Ex.PWI/F. PW1 in the

cross-examination has categorically denied that his father

was unhealthy and fell down in front of the bus due to

vertigo. It is pertinent to mention here that the accused has

been unable to bring on record any evidence to show that

the victim was suffering from vertigo and to prove his

above said contention. Rather, in the cross-examination

PW1 has again strengthened the prosecution story that his

father was 70 years old and was hale and hearty.

10. Further, for establishing the factum of rashnes