The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 17.12.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Shimla, District Shimla camp at Rohru, (learned Appellate Court) vide which judgment of conviction dated 06.12.2011 and order of sentence dated 08.12.2011 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Rohru, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were partly modified. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that the police presented a challan before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that Hira Lal (PW1) had gone to Chirgaon to purchase the articles on 21.02.2009. He was going to Chirgaon Bazaar to fetch the labourers at about 1:30 PM, when a Bolero camper bearing registration No. HP-10A-1183, being driven by Jai Pal (the accused), came at high speed and hit the informant. The accident occurred due to the high speed of the vehicle and the negligence of the accused. The matter was reported to the police, and an entry (Ext.PW8/A) was recorded in the Police Station. Head Constable Bharat Singh (PW10) went to the hospital to verify the correctness of the information. He recorded the informant’s statement (Ext.PW1/A) and sent it to the Police Station, where FIR (Ext.PW10/A) was registered. HC Bharat Singh (PW10) filed an application (Ext.PW10/C) for the medical examination of the injured. Dr Sanjay Vishwas (PW12) examined the injured and found that he had sustained grievous injuries which could have been caused within more than half an hour of the examination. He issued the MLC (Ext.PW12/A). He advised X-rays. HC Bharat Singh (PW10) visited the spot and prepared the site plan (Ext.PW10/D). He seized the vehicle bearing registration No. HP-10A-1183 vide memo (Ext.PW9/A). HC Sanjeev Kumar (PW11) mechanically examined the vehicle and found that there was no mechanical defect in it that could have led to the accident. He issued the report (Ext.PW11/A). 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.

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 279, 337 and 338 of the IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

The prosecution examined 13 witnesses to prove its case. Hira Lal (PW1) is the informant/victim. Ravinder (PW2), Ati Ram (PW3), Ranjit Saini (PW4), Mohan Singh (PW5) and Prem Singh (PW6) are the eyewitnesses. Bhim Singh (PW7) was told about the incident and accompanied the injured to the hospital. Constable Gian Singh (PW8) proved the entry in the daily diary. Jaswant Lal (PW9) witnessed the recovery of the Bolero. HC Bharat Singh (PW10) investigated the matter. HC Sanjeev Kumar (PW11) mechanically examined the vehicle. Dr Sanjay Viswas (PW12) examined the injured/victim. SI Ramphal Yadav (PW13) signed the FIR and partly investigated the matter.

The accused, in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), admitted that he was driving the vehicle bearing registration No. HP-10A-1183 on 21.02.2009 at about 1:30 p.m. at Chirgaon Bazaar. He denied the rest of the prosecution's case. He stated that he was falsely implicated in this case and that the witnesses falsely deposed against him. He did not produce any evidence in his defence.

The learned Trial Court held that the testimonies of prosecution witnesses proved that the accused had reversed his vehicle at a high speed and hit the injured, who sustained simple and grievous injuries. Minor contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses we