Crl. Revision No.1327 of 2004

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Revision No.1327 of 2004

DECIDED ON : 25.05.2009.

R.D.Dixit

Revisionist

VERSUS

State of Punjab

Respondent.

CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH

Present: Mr.Veneet Sharma, Advocate,

for the Revisionist.

Ms. D.S.Brar,

Deputy Advocate General,

Punjab, for the respondent.

JORA SINGH,J.

R.D.Dixit, through the instant revision has

challenged the impugned judgment dated 12.5.2004

rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.

Vide the impugned judgment, appeal

against the judgment/ order dated 11.7.1998, passed by

Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Amritsar was dismissed.

First Information Report No. 67 dated

Crl. Revision No.1327 of 2004

2

28.3.1993 under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC was

registered against R.D.Dixit revisionist

and the

revisionist was convicted under Section 304-A of the

Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to

pay a fine of Rs.300/-. In default of payment of fine, he

was directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment

for a period of one month.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that on

28.3.1993, Assistant Sub Inspector, Sukhdev Singh

along with the police party was present near by-pass

chowk at Verka in connection with routine duty.

Information was received from Guru Nanak Dev

Hospital, Amritsar regarding death of Joginder Singh

and admission of Shiv Lal Duggal, injured. Harbhajan

Singh met the police party and reported to the police that

he had gone to village Peerowal and after meeting his

relative, was returning from village Peerowal. Gurdip

Singh his relation was also with him on a scooter. They

were near village Pandori, Joginder Singh and Shiv Lal

Duggal were sighted while going towards Amritsar City

and that Joginder Singh was his brother-in-law, who on

seeing him had stopped his scooter which was being

driven by Shiv Lal Duggal. After parking the scooter, he

Crl. Revision No.1327 of 2004

3

wanted to cross the road to meet the complainant. In the

meantime, truck No. DEL 1883 came from the side of

Majitha. Truck was being driven rashly and negligently

without blowing the horn and was struck against

Joginder Singh and Shiv Lal Duggal. After the accident,

truck driver had fled away from the spot. After inquiry,

driver of the truck was found to be the revisionist.

Injured were shifted to Guru Nanak Dev Hospital,

Amritsar when Joginder was declared dead.

After recording the statement of Harbhajan

Singh, the same was sent to the police station, on the

basis of which formal First Information Report was

recorded.

Inquest report was prepared. Dead body was

handed over to the police officials for post mortem

examination. After investigating the spot, rough site

plan with correct marginal notes was prepared.

Offending vehicle was taken into police possession and

was got tested mechanically. Revisionist was arrested.

After completion of investigation, the accused

was challaned.

The revisionist was charged under Sections

279/304-A of the Indian Penal Code, to which he pleaded

not guilty and claimed trial.

Crl. Revision No.1327 of 2004

4

In order to substantiate the charge, prosecution

examined nine witnesses.

After the close of the prosecution evidence, the

revisionist was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. to

explain the entire allegation. Revisionist denied all the

allegations and claimed to be innocent. Defence version

of the revisionist is that he was falsely implicated. In

defence, three witnesses were produced.

Ultimately, the revisionist was convicted and

sentenced by the trial Court, as stated above.

Feeling dissatisfied with the judgment of the

trial Court, appeal was preferred, but the same was also

dismissed vide the impugned judgment.

I have heard Mr. Veneet Sharma