Sandeep Sharma, Judge (Oral)

1. Instant Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397/ 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, lays challenge to judgment dated 16.03.2015, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh(Camp at Nalagarh), in Criminal Appeal No.8-NL/10 of 2014, affirming judgment of conviction dated 28.03.2014 and order of sentence dated 11.04.2014, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.2, Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Case No.166/2 of 2009, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Jaswinder Singh, whereby learned trial Court, while holding petitioner-accused guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC, convicted and sentenced him as under:-

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record by the respective parties, are that FIR (Ex.PW9/A) came to be lodged on the basis of the statement made by complainant, Anil Kumar(PW-1) under Section 154 Cr.P.C, wherein he alleged that on 08.10.2008, while he alongwith his fiancée was going from Nalagarh to Baddi on his motorcycle bearing registration No.HP-12-C1371 and had reached near P.G. College, Nalagarh at 9.30 AM, accused came from the opposite side driving Bolero Jeep bearing registration No.HP-12-B-8007 and attempted to overtake the bus. While attempting to overtake the bus, accused allegedly hit the motorcycle of the complainant, as a result whereof, he alongwith pillion rider fell down and sustained injuries. PW-2, Sh. Saleem Kurashi, brother-in-law of the complainant allegedly rushed to the spot and took the injured to the hospital and gave telephonic information to the police. On receipt of such information, Inspector, Hem Raj, PW-10 went to the hospital at Nalagarh and recorded statement of the complainant Ex.PW1/A under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Police, after having completed necessary codal formalities, lodged the FIR, as detailed hereinabove, against the petitioner, who at the relevant time was allegedly driving the Bolero jeep in rash and negligent manner. After completion of the investigation, police presented the challan in the competent Court of law, which being satisfied that a prima-facie case exists against the accused, framed notice of accusation under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC against him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

3. Prosecution, with a view to prove its case, examined as many as 10 witnesses, whereas, accused in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., denied the case of the prosecution in toto. He claimed himself to be innocent and asserted that he had been falsely implicated in the case. However, despite opportunities having been afforded, no evidence ever came to be adduced on record at the behest of the accused.

4. Learned trial Court on the basis of the evidence made available on record by the prosecution, found accused guilty of having committed offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him, as per the description given hereinabove.

5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by learned trial Court, present petitioner-accused filed an appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh(Camp at Nalagarh), but same was also dismissed vide judgment dated 16.03.2025. In the aforesaid background, present petitioner-accused approached this Court by way of instant criminal revision petition, praying therein for his acquittal after quashing and setting-aside the impugned judgments passed by the learned courts bel