IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 324/2004 Date of decision: 30.5.2011 State of H.P. …..Appellant Versus Nand Lal ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Appellant: Mr. J.S. Rana Assistant Advocate General. For the respondents : Mr. G.R. Palsara, Advocate. Surinder Singh, J. (Oral) Respondent was acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned trial Court as such the State preferred the present appeal. 2. Prosecution case is that when minor son of Bhabna Devi (PW7) was crossing the road ahead of her, he was hit by a over speeding vehicle being driven by the respondent rashly and negligently. The injured was removed to the Hospital for medical aid. He was also sent for radiological examination and as 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes - 2 - per opinion of the Doctor, there was a fracture of left femur. The case as emerges from the evidence on record is that there was a feast going on in the house of one Krishan Kumar at village Nalsar situated besides National Highway, where PW7 along with her three daughters and injured son had gone. After the feast was over, about 25-30 ladies came on the side of the road to board the buses to their respective places, which included the complainant party. 3. According to Bhawna Devi (PW7) her three daughters were playing on the side of the road and she along with her injured son were crossing the road. She denied the suggestion that on seeing her Nani, the minor son went running across the road and on seeing him, respondent applied the brakes of the alleged offending vehicle. DW1 Durga Dass has probablized this defence. This fact is further corroborated by the site plan Ext. PW10/A prepared by the Investigating Officer, wherein the brakes and skid marks have been shown to the extent of 16 feet on a straight road which gives an inference that on seeing the boy running on the road, the respondent applied the brakes but still he could not avert the accident because the boy suddenly appeared from - 3 - one side of the road, that too, on the left side of the alleged offending vehicle. 4. Therefore, in these circumstances, rash or negligent act of driving by the respondent stands not proved. As such the impugned judgment of acquittal cannot be interfered with. The appeal is without any merit, hence dismissed. 5. The respondent is discharged of his bail bonds entered upon by him at any stage during the proceedings of this case. May 30, 2011 (Surinder Singh), (cm) Judge.