Trial court acquittal in rash driving death case upheld where site plan, photos showed motorcyclist on wrong side despite left space, hitting truck rear tyre; invalid licence not negligence per se; no appellate interference if reasonable view possible.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16.09.2014, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. II, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court), vide which the respondent (accused before learned Trial Court) was acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police filed a charge sheet against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of the IPC. It was asserted that the informant, Firtu Ram (PW10), was working as a labourer at Laharu. He was returning to Nurpur with his uncle Kumar on his motorcycle bearing registration No. HP38A- 1562 on 08.10.2015 at about 5:30 PM. The motorcycle reached Malakwal at about 5:45 PM when a truck bearing registration No. HP-38-3997 came from the opposite side and hit the motorcycle. The informant and Kumar fell on the roadside. They sustained injuries. They were carried in a van to the hospital. The accused, Swaroop Singh, was driving the truck at the time of the accident. The accident occurred due to his negligence and the high speed of the truck. The matter was reported to the police, and entry No. 29 (Ext.PW7/A) was registered in the Police Station. HC Subhash Chand (PW14) and HHC Lal Singh (PW8) were sent to verify the correctness of the information. HC Subhash Chand (PW14) recorded the Firtu Ram’s statement (Ext.PW10/A) and sent it to the Police Station, where FIR (Ext.PW12/A) was registered. HC Subhash Chand (PW14) went to the spot and prepared the site plan (Ext.PW14/A). Rajinder Soga (PW4) took the photographs of the spot (Ext.PW4/A to Ext. PW4/D) whose negatives are Ext.PW4/E to Ext.PW4/H. The truck was seized vide memo (Ext.PW3/A). Dr B.M. Gupta (PW6) examined Kumar and found that he had sustained multiple injuries which could have been caused in a Motor Vehicle accident. He advised X-rays and a CT scan and referred him to a higher institution for management. He issued the MLC (Ext.PW6/A). Dr B.M. Gupta (PW6) also examined Firtu Ram (PW10) and found that he had sustained multiple injuries and a suspected fracture of the left femur. He advised X-ray and issued the MLC (Ext.PW6/B). Kumar subsequently succumbed to his injuries. Dr Raman Sharma (PW2) conducted the postmortem examination of Kumar and found that Kumar had died due to multiple injuries, especially the head injury leading to brain haemorrhage and cardiac respiratory failure. He issued the report (Ext.PW2/A). He preserved the viscera and handed it over to the police official accompanying the deceased. Narinder Sood (PW5) conducted the mechanical examination of the motorcycle and found that it had no defect that could have caused the accident. The viscera was sent to SFSL, and no poison/alcohol was detected in the viscera as per the report (Ext.PW12/C). Statements of witnesses were recorded as per their version, and after the completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and presented before the learned Trial Court.

3. The learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused a