IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1328 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: August 29, 2011 Naveen Kumar .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Balkar Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Saini, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition challenges judgment of conviction, dated 6.5.2011 rendered by the Sessions Judge, Jind, vide which judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 10.12.2010 recorded by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind, have been upheld. The petitioner, accordingly, stands convicted for commission of offence under Section 279 and 304-A IPC as under:- “279 IPC RI for six months with fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo RI for one month. Crl. Revision No.1328 of 2011 [2] 304-A IPC RI for two years with fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo RI for three month.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the driver of the offending vehicle was not apprehended at the spot, and therefore, there is no evidence in regard to identification. In such circumstances, the petitioner deserves acquittal. 3. Three lives have been lost in the accident. The offending vehicle also turned turtle after hitting the motor-cycle being driven by the deceased. Therefore, the accident, per-se, cannot be denied. The driver of the vehicle fled after causing the accident. PW-6, Amit Kumar is a witness to the accident. In such circumstances, the plea taken on behalf of the petitioner that accused could not be identified, is not borne out from the record. 4. The fact that after hitting the motor-cycle the four wheeler also turned turtle, indicates that the four wheeler was being driven on high speed which was not controllable. 5. In view of the above, no ground for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction is made out. 6. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) August 29, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?