Cr.M.P(M) No. 316 of 2011. 09.05.2011. Present: Mr. J.S.Rana, Assistant Advocate General for appellant. The prosecution has examined PW1 Mehar Chand, PW5 Kanta Devi and PW6 Ramesh Chand, passengers of the bus. PW1 Mehar Chand turned hostile and he did not support the prosecution case. PW5 Smt. Kanta Devi in her examination-in-chief has stated that the driver while changing the cassette lost control of the bus and struck against the rock and caused accident. But, in cross-examination, she has stated that she was sitting in the middle of the bus which was over- crowded and, therefore, nothing was visible in front. Similar is the case of PW6 Ramesh Chand, who in examination-in-chief has supported the prosecution case by stating that driver while changing cassette lost the control of the bus and the accident took place. In cross-examination, he has stated that he was sitting almost at the rear tyre seat of the bus and, therefore, due to over-crowding of the bus, nothing was visible. The Trial Court has considered the evidence on record. No other bus passenger has been examined. The view taken by the learned Magistrate emerges from the material which has been discussed in the judgment. No case for grant of leave to file appeal is made out, hence, rejected. (Kuldip Singh), Judge. May 9, 2011. (krt)