State of Punjab vs Balraj Singh

V.M. Jain, J.

The respondent was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 304A and 279 I.P.C. After trial he was acquitted by the learned Magistrate. Aggrieved against the said acquittal, the State of Punjab has filed the present petition for grant of leave to appeal.

We have heard Mr. B.S. Sewak, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and have gone through the record.

As per the prosecution allegations Arjan Dass, deceased and Krishan Kumar, complainant had gone to Village Saidpura on two separate scooters and were returning to their village Nalini when the accident in question had taken place. Krishan Kumar, complainant is none else but the son of Arjan Dass, deceased. Considering that only the complainant and his father had gone to Village Saidpura, it was highly improbable that both of them would go on separate scooters. There was absolutely no occasion for them to go on separate scooters. The learned trial Magistrate found that Krishan Kumar, complainant was not present at the spot at the time of occurrence. While coming to this finding, the learned Magistrate took into consideration that he was not present at the spot at the time when the police reached the spot. Besides this infirmity, the learned Magistrate also found that the identity of the accused was doubtful. Admittedly, the accused was not apprehended at the spot as he had fled from the spot after leaving the truck. As per PW4 Mit Singh, A.S.I. the name of the accused being truck driver involved in the accident was supplied by the conductor of the truck, who also slipped away from the spot, after disclosing the name of the accused. Admittedly, no efforts were made by the police to locate the said conductor. The said conductor was definitely an important witness. However, for the reasons best known to the police, the police did not feel the necessity to locate the conductor or to record his statement during the investigation of this case. During crossexamination, A.S.I. Mit Singh had admitted that it was possible that the conductor had wrongly disclosed the name of the accused as truck driver. According to PW5, Krishan Kumar, complainant, the police came to know about the name of the truck driver from the licence which was found in the truck after the accident. Admittedly, no test identification parade was held in this case. Thus, the identification of the accused by Krishan Kumar, PW for the first time in Court would be of no consequence.

The learned Magistrate after considering the entire evidence ultimately acquitted the accused of the charge framed against him. In our opinion, there is no infirmity in the order of acquittal. Accordingly, the petition for leave to appeal is dismissed.