68 4 Crl Revision No 059 of 2009 1 e44 90 lN THE 1HIGHCOURT OF PUNJAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl Revision No059 of 2009 Decided on 5 02009 Avtar Singh VersuS Stateof Punjab 1 0 Presentl Mr Vivek Goel Advocate for thepetitioner C Mr SudhirNehra Addl AG Punjab I C5 KCPURl Je I Avtar Singh has filed this revision petitionilnpugning 1 judgmentand order dated 23Ol2008 passedby learned Chief Judicial Magistrate13athinda as affirmed in appcalpartlyvide judglnentdated I 08 24A2009 passedby learned Additional Sessions Judgc Bathinda acquitted the petitioner under Section 337 IPC only The petitioner stood 7 Z convicted by thc Iearnedtrial Court as under flm iIUnder Section 304A IPC R1 for onc year and linc of Rs3001 and 111 default to undergorigorous iinprlsonment for one month P Under Section279 Rl for a pcriodofsix nionths 71 sic337JIPC 1r Under Section279 IPC Rl for six monthsand fine ofRs2001 111 default ofpayment of fne furtherRl for 15 days All the sentences were orderedto run The prosecution casc Itl brief is that on 2232004 ASl Gurbir Slnghalongwith other policeofOcials was preselltin thcarea of 11anuman Chowk Bathinda and recordedthe statcment of who 1 Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 69 2 Crl Revision No1059 of 2009 2 vlra beJ statedthat on that day at 190 aln he was proceeding to Hanulnan ChowkBathinda from patrolpumpchowk on his scooter 14isbrotherArun Kumar was ahead 01 hiin on his inotorcyclealongwith his Riti A truck NoMP 09D12667 beingdriven rashly and by a hair cut personat a fast speed came there The driver ofthe 1 1 truck crossed the and struck it againstArun Kumar from 0 behind He crushed Arun Kumar and his daughtcrtherebyjumpedaway 0 I froin the They received injuries The driver of the truck C5 itand thereafterran away therefrom He could tdenty him On I thebasis of the above inentioned statement FIR was recorded ASI Gurbir Z Singhheld inquestreporton the dead bodyof deccasedArun Kulnar Post C mortem of the dead bodywas also conducted Aller coinpletionof I challan againstthc revisionist was in the necessary a5 trial Court for trial vaeo On appearanceof the petitionerln the Court copiesof the Z docuinentswere supplied to him underrules Qe Finding a primafacie case chargeunder Sections279 337 and 304A of the IPC was fralned againstthe petitionerto which the petitioner pleadednot guiltyandclailned trial To prove its case the examinedHC Ajaib6PWJ Dikshan 00W Drheln j Bansal 39C4I RanjitSingh6PWI Gora Lal OOW5JHC SandipSingh6P6l and AST Gurbir Singh0W The petitionerin his statelnent under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 0 in short CrPI claimed to be innocent and denied the allegations However hc examined Gurdev Singh Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 1 Crl Revision No 1059of 2009 3 4 1 4 6DWl in defence The Iearned lrial Court held the petitionerguiltyunder Sections279 337 and 304A of the lPC and sentenccdhim as narrated above The appealpreferredby the pctitioner before learned Additional SessionsJudgeand the IearnedAppellateCourt acquitted the 1 under Section 337 IPC only but dislnissed the appeaiqua remaining 0 offences callingfor no interfcrencein theiinpugned judglncntand ordcr of C I conviction passedbythe learnedtrial Court C5 Feelingdissatisfled with the abovesaid both the judginents of I 4 conviction theconvictlpelitioner hasprefened the lllstant reVlSlOn Z I have heard learned counsel for the partiesand perusedthe Ct file I Lcarned counsel for the revisionist has subnlitted that no test 08 idcntification paradewas conducted The witnesses havc identiOed the 7 revisionist for the first time on 292005 althoughthe occurrence took Z placeOll 223 2004 ie eleven months after the accident and as such the Qm identiflcation for the ftrst tilne lll the Court is inanaged o supportthis 1 conten8on learned counsel for lhe rcvisionist has relied upon authority 1 Sunder 0a9Surindcr vs Statc of Haryana 199921RCR ICriminall 554 Siinilar argumentswere advanced before both thc Courts bclow also but thesesublnissions find mcritlessby both the Courts beiow This aspectof the case has beenwell discussedbylearnedAppellate Court in paragraph 8 of its j udgment The law settled 111 this regardwas also discussed Both the Courts below havegivenconcurrent findingregarding gulllofthe accused and I do not see any reason to interferetherewitl The Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 71 1 2009 4 flrst Court has rightlyheld that the iinageof the driver would be embodiedin the inind of the witness and that imagecannot fade away during the periodof eleven inonths onl So in thcsc circulnstances the in thc case of Sunder C Surinder ipral also does not helpthe revisiont ln any manner 1 Learnedcounsel for the revisionist has further submittedthat O according to the the daughter of deceasednamely Riti vas C I in thc occurrcncc and she has not becn cxamincd he Icalned 0 Court has acquitted the accused under Section 337 IPC as the mm mm lllJUries on the person of Riti daughter ofthe deceased have not been Z proved So it lS submittedthat best witncss has been withheld by the and as such sloryis doubtful I I have carefully consideredthe said subinission but do not flnd 08 anyforce in that submission m7 The counsel for the revisionist was asked about thc age of that Z girlbut he was fair enough to concede that the age of Ritl daughter of the tl deceasedis not borne out from the record In 3 case a child of 2 to 5 4 yearshas received injuryand that has not been producedin that case no adverseinference can be drawn againsttheprosecutionSo thc abovesaid argumentis also withoulanv Ieealforce Learncd counsel for the appellanthas further sublnitted that Dikshan Kumar OPWw2Iis real brotherofdeceased and Gora Lal 6PW 1S also closelyrclated to the deceased l3oth of them have COllle forward simplyto advancc the case ofthe prosecutionIt is nol lnentioned in the testiinony of Dikshan Kumar 6PV21and Gora Lal OW9 was with hillle If Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 72 9 2rl Revision No1059 of 2009 5 t So both thesewitnesscsarc madeup witnesscs I havc carclulJy consideredthe said submission but do not flnd anyforce in that subinission also The testimonyofthe relativcand intercstedwitnessescannot be discardedsolelyon thebaslsofrelationshipThc courtcan pulat cauliOn to m scrutinizethetestiinonyofinterestcd witnesseslrelativewitnesseswilh inore 0 caie and caution Both the Courts below have thc testnony of 0 Dikshan Kumar 0W and Gora Lal 6PH51anddid not nd any fault I C0 Othcrwise duringthe course of argumcntsno glaringfact to discard the tcstimony of thszwitness have becn pointedout So the above mentioned Z argumentis also without any substance Learnedcounsel for the revisionist has further subnlitted that 0 46e I has failed to prove the the partof revisionist A 08 highspced1S not negligentact and thc prosccutionhas tO IOrOvethat V7 accident took placcdue to rash and negligent driving Lcarncd counsel for Z the revisionist has rclied upon authority in Aiaib Sin2h vs State ofPunjab 2000121 RCR lCriminall 737 1 have carefullyconsidcred thc sald sublnission Dikshan Kulnar 6PH29and Gora Lal 0M59 havc catcgoricallystalcd that accident has takenplacedue to rash and negligcntdrivingof the truck in question So the revisionist cannot have beneflt of authorityAiaib Sinehs case 1supral as the rash and ncgligentact stands provedbcyondreasonabledoubt from thetestimony of Dikshan Kumar 21and Gora Lal 6PHa59 Lastly the learnedcounsel for the revisionist has sublnitledthat revisionlst may be granted concesslOO of probation under the Probation of Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 73 Crl Revision No 059 of 2009 6 OffendersAct To supportthis contention he has relied upon authority as under 619Vaswa Nand vs State 2001141 RCR fCriminall 784 29 Sudhir Kumar VSe State of Puniab 2004111RCR 4Criminall 795 639Lakhwinder Dass VSe State of Puniab 200611 RCR Criminall 825 and 0 649Daliit Singhand others vs State ofPuniab throueh C Secretarv Home Affairs 2006131RCR iminall 8680 I C5 Alternative prayerhasbeenmadefor reductionin sentence 6 I havecarefullyconsideredthe said subinission Z So far as the prayer for grantof probation in view of Sudhir s Kumars case is concemed that prayer cannot be acceptedThe I revlSlOnist has taken away the life of a young person The Honble Apex 08 Court in case Dalbir Sineh VSe State of Haryana 2000 Criminal Law Journal 1SCI 2283 has held that normallythe concesslOll of probation of 7 Z offenders Actshould not be granted tothe accused under Section 304A C1 IPC So the said authorityofHonble Supreme Court will prevailover other authoritles relied upon by the appellanlas detailed above So far as authority in Daliit Sineh and others case Isupralis concernedthat relates to convlctlon under Section 324 IPC and not under Section 304A IPC So thatauthority is also not helpfulto therevisionist So in view of the facl that revisionist is facingtrial for the last more than five and half years sentence awarded by the trial Court under Section 304A IPC stands reduced to rigorous for iline monthsinstead of one year However the sentenceof One under Section 304A IPC and sentence awardedunder Section279 IPC standafrmed Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 74 1 1 Crl Revision No1059 0f 2009 7 0 Wlth the abovc said modification in thc sentcncc the revision petition standsdisposcd of A copy of lhis judgmentbc scnt to thc trial Court for strict compliance October58 2009 KC PURI I 1 SV JUDGE 0 1 C 4Jl I 6 Y4 5 1 1 Z r I C45 7 Z Il tl 5d Gupta Suruchi 2013.03.19 11: 51 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document