IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

253 CRR-2292-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 16.12.2025.

GAGANDEEP KUMAR ...Petitioner(s)

VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ...Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mrs. Amarjeet Kaur, mother of the petitioner in person VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. The instant criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.07.2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Moga, whereby the revisionist-petitioner had been convicted for commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 304-A, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) in case bearing FIR No. 69 dated 05.05.2016 registered under Sections 279, 304-A, 338, 427 IPC at Police Station Dharamkot, Moga as well as judgment dated 21.08.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga vide which appeal filed by the revisionist- petitioner has been dismissed. The revisionist-petitioner has been sentenced as under:-

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The aforesaid case had been registered at the instance of Lakhvir Kaur that on 04.05.2016 at about 9:30 pm, within the area of Police Station Dharamkot, District Moga (near Grain Market, Jalalabad East), petitioner while driving Car make Swift bearing Registration No. HR-26- AT-3821 in a rash and negligent manner on a public way hit Ranjit Singh, who was changing the punctured tyre of Scorpio bearing Registration No. DL-8CL-0909 owned by Rachhpal Singh. As a result of collision, Ranjit Singh succumbed to injuries and Rachhpal Singh also received grievous injuries. The Scorpio car was also damaged due to the collision.

3. On the basis of aforesaid statement, FIR in the present case was registered and investigation was conducted. During the course of investigation, IO recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161, Cr.P.C. Petitioner- Accused was arrested. After completion of investigation and other necessary formalities, challan against the accused was prepared and presented against the accused.

4. On presentation of challan, copies of documents were supplied to accused free of costs as per Section 207, Cr.P.C.

5. Finding that a prima facie case is made out, the petitioner was charge-sheeted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279/304-A/338/427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the contents of the same were read over and explained to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined the following nine witnesses:

7. Prosecution failed to examine its remaining witnesses despite availing several effective opportunities. Resultantly, remaining prosecution evidence was closed by order.

8. The statement of the petitioner was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein all incriminating circumstances and evidence appearing on record were put to him. The petitioner denied the allegations in its entirety, describing the prosecution case and evidence as false and fabricated, and asserted his innocence. He specifically pleaded that he was falsely implicated in the present case on asking of Dimple son of Jagdarshan Kaur, Local Congress leader of Dharamkot, District Moga.

9. After considering the arguments advanced by the counsels of the parties, the testimonies of witnesses, and the evidence placed on record, the learned Judicial Magistrate1st Class, Moga, vide judgment and order of quantum of sentence dated 06.07.2019 , held the petitioner guilty of offences punishable under Sections 279, 304-A, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

10. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 158 of 2019 before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga. However, vide judgment dated 21.08.2025, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, dismissed the aforesaid ap