Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ram Chander vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 10 November, 2014
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
......
Criminal Misc. No.28521 of 2014
and
Criminal Revision No.2911 of 2014 (O&M)
.....
Date of decision:10.11.2014
Ram Chander
...Petitioner
v.
State of Haryana and another
Respondents
....
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. Arpandeep Narula, Advocate for the petitioner.
.....
Inderjit Singh, J.
Cr. Misc. No.28521 of 2014:
For the reasons mentioned in the criminal miscellaneous application, the delay of 28 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.
The criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of. Cr. Rev. No.2911 of 2014 (O&M):
The petitioner has filed this criminal revision petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 25.9.2012 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mandi Dabwali, whereby accused Shamsher Singh has been acquitted of the charges as framed against him and also the impugned judgment dated 24.4.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa upholding HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.11.25 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Revision No.2911 of 2014 (O&M) [2] the above judgment of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate.
It is stated in the revision petition that vide the impugned judgment dated 24.4.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa and the impugned judgment dated 25.9.2012 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mandi Dabwali, accused Shamsher Singh (respondent No.2) has been acquitted in case FIR No.6 dated 2.1.2007 registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.
From the record, I find that the FIR was registered on receiving of `Ruqa' regarding the admission of Ram Chander, Patwari in CHC, Dabwali, who has already been referred. The FIR was registered on the statement of elder brother of the injured, namely, Ganga Ram.
As per his statement, at about 8.00 a.m., his brother was going on his motorcycle for attending the computer course at Mandi Dabwali and when he reached near Semnala near Alikan Link Road, then an unknown vehicle, which was driven in a rash and negligent manner and at a high speed hit the motorcycle of his brother. He was telephonically informed by Rajesh alias Billu about the accident. On receiving this information, he along with Sampuran Singh reached there and took his brother for his medical treatment to CHC Dabwali. After giving him the first aid, the doctor referred him and they took his brother to Bharat Brain Hospital, Bathinda. His brother had received injuries on different parts of his body HARPAL SINGH PARMAR and the motorcycle was also got damaged in the accident. Some unknown 2014.11.25 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Revision No.2911 of 2014 (O&M) [3] person had caused the accident.
A perusal of the judgments shows that the injured has not been examined in this case. The other witnesses are the Police officials and the formal witnesses. The private witnesses, who have been examined in this case, namely, PW-3Ganga Ram, PW-1Bhagwan Dass, PW-6 Puran Singh, have categorically stated that they were not present at the time of the accident and they were later on telephonically informed by some other person regarding the accident. The learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused as the prosecution has failed to lead cogent evidence against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
I have gone through the findings given by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate as well as learned Additional Sessions Judge. In no way, the findings can be held as illegal or perverse. No evidence has been misread by the Courts below nor any material evidence has been left by the Courts. The findings are with reasoning and as per law.
Therefore, from the above discussion, I find that no illegality has been committed by the Courts below while passing the impugned judgments, which are correct and as per law and do not require any interference from this Court.
Finding no merit in the criminal revision petition, the same is dismissed.
November 10, 2014. (Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.11.25 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh