In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Revision No. 1919 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision:27-01-2009 Shamsher Singh ---Petitioner versus Kirpal Singh and another ---Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Sherry K.Singla,Advocate, for the petitioner SABINA, J.(Oral) Kirpal Singh-respondent No. 1 was tried by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala for offence under Section 279/304A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'). The trial court acquitted Kirpal Singh of the charges framed against him vide impugned judgment dated 12.7.2007. Aggrieved by the same, complainant has filed the present revision petition. The prosecution story, in brief, as noticed by the trial court in para 2 of its judgment, is as under:- “In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 19.5.2003, complainant Shamsher Singh son of Ajit Singh, resident of village Khasian got recorded his statement Ex. PA with the police whereby he disclosed that on that day his elder brother Gurtej Singh @ Guddu was returning to village Khansian from village Chechra District Kaithal on his scooter bearing registration No. PB-11N-3430. When he Crl. Revision No. 1919 of 2008(O&M) -2- reached near petrol pump of village Mardanheri, near deras of Dehrian, he met with an accident, with some unidentified car. The driver of the car sped away with his vehicle from the place of occurrence, but the impressions of the car tyres could be seen at the spot on the road and this fact was disclosed to him by Baljit Singh son of Arjan Singh, resident of village Kokepur on telephone. After hearing about the accident, the complainant went to the spot in his jeep no. PCP-412 where he found his brother lying on the road. The complainant shifted his brother to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala, in his jeep where he was declared dead by the Doctors. The accident was caused by the driver of an unidentified car by his rash and negligent driving. ii) On the basis of statement Ex. PA, as recorded by ASI Jagdish Kumar, the case was registered by the police under Section 279/304 IPC vide FIR Ex. PA/2. Thereafter, the investigator visited the spot and prepared rough site plan Ex. PD of the place of occurrence. The scooter of the deceased Ajit Singh bearing registration No. PB-11N-3430 was taken into police possession vide recovery memo Ex. PB. The body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination. Photographer was arranged, who took the photographs of the site of the accident, which was later on taken into possession along with negatives vide recovery memo Ex. PW 6/A. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Crl. Revision No. 1919 of 2008(O&M) -3- Additional statement of complainant Shamsher Singh Ex. PW 4/A was recorded on 30.5.2003 whereby he implicated accused Kirpal Singh to be driver of the bus, which cause the death of his brother Gurtej Singh by rash and negligent driving. The accused was arrested in this case and the bus bearing registration No. PB -11V-8825 along with driving licence of the accused were taken into possession vide separate recovery memo. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of necessary formalities of investigation challan against the accused was presented in court for trial.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial court had erred in acquitting Kirpal Singh-respondent No. 1, as the prosecution has been successful in proving its case. Both the eye witnesses PW-5, Ranjit Singh and PW-7 Satwant Singh have duly proved the case of the prosecution. Accident in this case had allegedly taken place on 19.5.2003. In the FIR, the case of the complainant was that the accident had occurred with some unidentified car and said fact was disclosed to him by Baljit Singh on telephone. After getting the information, complainant reached the spot and took his brother to Rajindra Hospital, Patiala where he was declared dead. Statement of the eye witnesses were recorded on 31.5.2003. The said eye witnesses i.e. PW-5 Ranjit Singh and PW-7 Satwant Singh had not bothered to take the injured to the hospital or inform the police regarding the accident. Initially in the FIR, it was mentioned that the accident had taken place with some unidentified car whereas later on it was averred on the basis of the statements of the eye Crl. Revision No. 1919 of 2008(O&M) -4- witnesses recorded on 31.5.2003 that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 while driving Bus No. PB- 11V-8825. Due to these circumstances, the learned trial court has disbelieved the testimony of the alleged eye witnesses as their statements were recorded after more than two weeks of the accident and the fact that the said eye witnesses had failed to inform the police or the complainant regarding accident and had further not bothered to take the injured to the hospital. The learned trial court, in these circumstances has rightly acquitted Kirpal Singh-respondent No. 1 of the charges framed against him. In view of the above, Impugned judgment dated 12.7.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, does not call for any interference. Accordingly, this criminal revision petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE January 27, 2009 PARAMJIT