IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Appeal No. 207 of 2015

Reserved on: 09.12.2025

Decided on: 01.01.2026

State of Himachal Pradesh

...…. Appellant

Versus

Anup Kumar …. Respondent

Coram

The Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the Appellant : Mr Lokender Kutlehria, Additional

Advocate General.

/State

For the Respondent : Mr Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate, for the

respondent.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The present appeal is directed against the judgment

idated 29.10.2014, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before the learned Trial Court) was acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes.

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 presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of the IPC. It was asserted that a van bearing registration No. HP-39B-5912 hit Piungla Devi (since deceatsed), who was crossing the road on 18.12.2012 at about 3:00 p.m. She fell on the road and sustained injuries to her head and ear. The informant Sunita Devi (PW-4) and Rajesh Kumar (PW-5) carried the injured to the hospital. Accused Anup Kumar was driving the vehicle bearing hregistration No. HP39B-5912 at a high speed and in a negligent manner, which led to the accident. The matter was reported to the police, and an entry (Ext.PW-11/A) was recorded in the Police Station. HC Madan Lal (PW-11) was sent to the spot for verification. He filed an application (Ext.PW-3/A) for medical examination of Piungla Devi and certification of her fitness to make the statement. Dr Desh Raj (PW-3) certified that Piungla Devi was not fit to make the statement. He conducted the medical examination and found multiple injuries, which could have been caused in the motor vehicle accident. He issued MLC (Ext.PW3/B) and referred the injured to the higher institution for management. HC Mandal Lal (PW-11) recorded the informant’s statement (Ext.PW-4/A) and sent it to the Police Station, where F.I.R. (Ext.PW-8/A) was registered. HC Madan Lal (PW-11) went to the spot and took photographs (Ext.PW- 11/B1 to Ext.PW-11/B3). He preparedf the site plan (Ext.PW- 11/C), as per the spot position. Accused Anup Kumar produced the vehicle bearing registration No. HP-39B-5912, which was seized vide memo (Ext.PW-5/A). Pinugla Devi succumbed to her injuries at Dr Rajendra Prasad Govt. Medical College & Hospital, Tanda. ASI Anil Kumar (PW-10) visited the hospital and prepared the inquest report (Ext.PW-10/A). He filed an application (Ext.PW-10/B) for conducting the post-mortem examination of the deceased. Dr Sushil Sharma (PW-1) conducted the post-mortem examination and found that the cause of death was traumatic shock as a result of head injury, which could have been caused in a road traffic accident. He issued post mortem report (Ext.PW-1/A). The accused produced the documents of the vehicle and his driving license (Ex.PA), which were seized vide memo (Ext.PW-2/A). Joginder Singh (PW-7) mechanically examined the vehicle and found that there was no mechanical defect in it, which could have led to the accident. He issued the report (Ext.PW-7/A). The statements of prosecution witnesses were recorded as per their version, and after completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and presented before the learned Trial Court.

3. Learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, a notice of accusation was put to him for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 2t79 and 304-A of the IPC, to which