IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 2002. Date of decision:26.12.2008. ________________________________________________________ State of H.P. .. ..Appellant Versus Vijay Kumar .. ..Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the Appellant: Mr.Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy.A.G. For the respondent: Mr.P.C. Sharma, Advocate _____________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(oral) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.7.2001 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. in Criminal Case No.16/II/97 whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 21.9.1995 when the complainant Bhag Singh was crossing the Dehra-Dhaliara road at village Sunhet one scooter came from Dehra side at a high speed and hit the complainant. The complainant fell down and became unconscious. He was removed to the hospital at Dehra where he regained consciousness in the evening then he came to know that he was hit by scooter No.PAL 6498. Thereafter, the police was informed. FIR was recorded and investigation done. The learned trial Court after …2… trial acquitted the accused mainly on the ground that it had not been established that it was the accused who was driving the vehicle which hit the complainant. Injured Bhag Singh was examined in the Court as PW-2. He could not state who was the driver of the scooter. He also could not give the number of the scooter. According to him, one Sh.Sultan Singh who was present in his shop at village Sunhet had informed him about the scooter number. He also states that his son had told him about the scooter number. Neither the son nor Sh.Sultan Singh have been examined by the prosecution. PW-1 Mansa Devi has stated that the accused was driving the scooter but she could not identify the scooter number. No reliance can be placed on the statement of PW-1 since admittedly she did not know the accused prior to the incident. She does not remember the number of the scooter or the colour thereof. According to her, the scooter came at a very high speed and fled away. If that be so, she could not have identified the accused for the first time in Court. In such an event it was necessary to the prosecution to have conducted a test identification parade. Since no such parade was conducted the learned trial Court rightly held that the identification by PW-1 cannot be relied upon. In the FIR it was stated that one Bishan Dass was also standing near the place of the accident. However, he has not been examined. …3… The prosecution has miserably failed to prove that it was the accused who was driving the scooter which hit the injured. The learned trial Court rightly acquitted the accused. There is no merit in the appeal which is accordingly rejected. Bail bonds furnished by the accused are ordered to be discharged. December 26, 2008. ( Deepak Gupta ), PV Judge