State of Punjab vs Harbhajan Singh

S.D. Bajaj, J.—ASI Gulzara Singh of police station, Talwara sent the following writing to S.H.O., Police State, Talwara, at 3.45 PM, on 15th of March, 1983, "Shrimanji, If is submitted that today, I the ASI along with Shri Mohinder Singh H.C., Bachan Singh C. No. 585, Milkha Singh C. No. 128 in the Govt. Jeep No. 8196, PNH driven by Shankar Lal was present near the office of Land Acquisition, Sector No. 2, Talwara in connection with the patrol duty, it was about 2.30 PM., a bus bearing registration No. 9969 PUH driven by Harbhajan Singh No. 40L, whose name was known later on belonging to Beas Project came on the read from the side of the Bazar at Talwara with high speed. The aforesaid Bus struck Kikar Singh Naib Tehsildar, office of Land Acquisition, Talwara who was going on a bicycle on the road, as a result of which Kikar Singh fell down. Immediately after falling down he received an injury on the head and blood started oozing out. When he was being brought to the hospital in the same bus, which caused the accident, he breathed his last on the way. Harbhajan Singh, driver aforesaid having driven the bus rashly and negligently, caused the death of Kikar Singh aforesaid. Hence he has committed an offence punishable u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, this writing is being sent through Bechan Singh C. No. 585 to the Police Station for the registration of a case (FIR). After registering the Case (FIR), its number may be intimated. I am busy in the investigation." On its basis formal FIR No. 12 was registered against the accused in P.S. Talwara, at 4.00 P.M. on March 15, 1983.

On being charged with the commission of the offence u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code, the accused pleaded, ''not guilty'' and claimed to be tried. Vide its impugned judgment dated February 23, 1985, learned trial court acquitted the accused. Feeling aggrieved there form the State of Punjab filed Criminal Appeal No. 372-DBA of 1985 in this Court.

We have heard Shri S.K. Sharma, DAG Punjab, for the opposite Shri A.S. Kalra, Advocate, for the respondent and carefully perused the relevant record.

In the course of his statement u/s 313 Criminal Procedure Code, accused Harbhajan Singh stated, "I am innocent. I had taken the aforesaid bus from Transport Yard of Beas Dam Talwara which is situated at a distance of 200/250 yards from the place of occurrence and I had to take the labour to the Railway Station. On making stops at short distances on the way. I was picking up the labour and the question of high speed could not arise. It would be hardly 15 kilometers per hour and I was on my right (proper) side. I was playing horn also. There is a turn near the place of occurrence from where a passage leads to the office of Land Acquisition. Due to the turning I more reduced the speed and tried to play horn, When I was 3/4 yard behind the turning, a cyclist at once emerged on the main road with a fast speed from the side of the office of Land Acquisition. I at once applied the brakes of the bus but the cyclist carelessly struck his cycle with my bus and fell down. The bus was stopped there. At the time of the aforesaid occurrence excepting me and the passengers of the bus, no one else was present there. The witnesses in this case were also not present at the spot. I put the person in the same bus, took him to the hospital and informed my department. Taking the officials of my department with them, the police brought me in the Police Van to the Canal Hospital at Talwara at about 4.15 P.M. whereas the occurrence had taken place at 2.30 P.M. or 2.45 P.M. Later on a false case was foisted upon me at the instance of the relatives and the friends of the deceased by the police. The deceased wanted to cross the road." Conductor in the bus Prem Chand DW1 meticulously stood by the defence version divulged by the accused as aforesaid.

Entrustment of investigation to the author of the FIR, ASI Gulzara Singh PW7; change in the place of occurrence brought about by the Investigating Officer adverted to by PW4 Saran Dass; absence of skid marks of the bus tyres noticed by the Investigation Officer from photographs Ex.P8 to Ex.P16; bus coming to a halt at the place of impact itself on sudden application of brakes thereto; irreconcilable contradictions of material particulars noticed by the learned trial court in the depositions of the two eye witnesses in HC Mohinder Singh PW3, ASI Gulzara Singh PW7 and failure of the investigating agency to join any independent witness from the locality during investigation, are all circumstances which sound the death knell of the prosecution case set up against the accused.

According to he learned trial court, A perusal of the site plan of the place of accident Ex.PG shows that the Land Acquisition Officer where deceased Kikar Singh was posted, is just near the place of accident. The site plan also shows that a link road from the main road diverts to the Land Acquisition Office from near the place of accident. It is thus, probable that the deceased had started from his office and the accident happened at the time when he ascended the main road from the link road. The place of accident is just near the turning of the link road from the main road and this circumstance lends a touch of truth to the defence version that the accident happened when the deceased with out caring for the traffic on the main road tried to cross the main road .the absence of photographs of the skid marks is an other circumstance strengthening the probability of the defence version.

The prosecution also did not join Prem Chand DW1 conductor of the bus in the investigation and his evidence in the defence can not be lightly disbelieved. The investigation itself is improper because the complainant himself is the Investigating Officer. No official of the office of deceased Kikar Singh, who came to the place of accident/Civil Hospital, was joined in the investigation and thus best and independent evidence was withheld. As discussed above, PW3 and PW7 have made contradictory statements on a number of facts and that rule out their presence at the time of the accident.

The fact that the bus stopped at the very place where the accident took place shows that it was being driven very slowly and certainly not at a rash speed. Had the speed of the bus been rash, keeping in view the small object i.e. the bicycle with which it had struck, it would certainly have gone up to a distance of at least 30 to 50 yards before stopping. The place of accident itself has been contradicted by P.W. 4 Saran Dass and it appears that in order to save the deceased, the bus driver tried to go towards right side of the road but despite his effort, the deceased struck his bicycle in the bus. It appears that the deceased came on the main road suddenly from the link road, taking the accused by surprise for which no negligence can be attributed to the accused.

In result, the appeal filed by the State of Punjab against his acquittal gets wholly beneft of any merit therein and is accordingly dismissed.