Delhi District Court
State vs Roshan Lal on 23 May, 2014
IN THE COURT OF MS.AMBIKA SINGH: METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-08:
CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS
DELHI
FIR No.65/07
State V/s Roshan Lal
U/S 304-A IPC
PS Sadar Bazar
CC No. 557/2
U. ID No. 02401R0717322007
Date of Institution :26.07.2007
Date of commission of offence :07.03.2007
Name of the complainant : Sh. Bittu Ram
Name and address of accused : Roshan Lal S/o Late Sh. Nanu Ram,
R/o Vill & PO Kharak Kalan,
Distt. Bhiwani, PS Bhiwani Sadar
Thana (HR)
Offence charged with :304A IPC
Plea of guilt : Pleaded not guilty.
Final Order : Acquitted
Date on which order has been reserved : 25.04.2014
Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 23.05.2014
JUDGMENT
1 The Prosecution has filed the charge sheet against the accused Roshan Lal S/o Late Sh. Nanu Ram for the offence u/s 304-A IPC. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:-
FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 1/7 That on 7.3.2017 at about 12 mid night near Vishal Roadways, Rui Mandi, Bahadur Garh Road, Sadar Bazar, Delhi, within the jurisdiction of PS Sadar Bazar, accused Roshan Lal while working as transport incharge adn getting 100 kd. Rolls loaded on tempo no. HR 63A 0673 he caused the death of Tara Chand and he neglected to take any precautions while getting the rolls loaded and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 304-A IPC.
2 After completion of investigation, notice u/s 281 for the offence punishable u/s 304-A IPC was framed on 19.02.2008 against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3 Prosecution has examined the following witnesses in support of its case:-
4 PW1 ASI Satpal deposed that on 08.03.2007 he recorded the FIR Exh. PW1/A on the basis of rukka sent by ASI Dalel Singh through HC Ram Kirpal. The witness has also proved the attested copies of Entry No. 4B & 8B dated 8.3.2007 as Exh. PW1/B & Exh. PW1/C. 5 PW2 Sh. Puran Chand deposed that he was working in the year 2007 as labourer in transport company at 519, Lahori Gate, Delhi. On that day, at about 4.30 a.m he had received a telephonic call regarding injuries caused to Tara Chand at Sadar Bazar and before his reaching to the spot, the body of Tara Chand was removed to hospital. He then went to police station and thereafter to hospital and took the body of deceased after postmortem. He proved the inquest report as Ex. PW2/A and the handing over body receipt as Ex. PW2/B. 6 PW3 Hem Chand has deposed that in the year 2007 he was running a shop of transport agency at 2239, Main Bahadurgarh Road, Rui Mandi, Sadar FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 2/7 Bazar, Delhi. After some time, he came to know that Chaudhary of labourers namely Tara Chand has fallen down. He went to the spot at 2324 but did not find Tara Chand as he was removed to hospital. He then went to the hospital where Tara Chand was under treatment and after some time, Tara Chand died in hospital under treatment. The witness correctly identified the accused.
7 PW4 Bittu Ram, who is the complainant in the present case has deposed that he was working with New India Transport Company as a Loader alongwith 5-6 persons including the Contractor Tara Chand. On the date of incident, Tara Chand was also loading the Nug in the vehicle due to shortage of workers, during which he slipped/fell down from the vehicle and the Nug also fell down upon him, resulting serious injuries to Tara Chand. Police came to the spot and shifted the injured Tara Chand to hospital. PW4 also went to the hospital and identified the dead body of Tara Chand , who was his cousin brother, vide memo Exh. PW4/A. IO prepared the site plan Exh. PW4/B and also recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C.
8 PW5 Sh. Hukam Chand, S/o Sh. Hansram deposed that the Incharge of the company, with which he was working, was Roshan Lal and Tara Chand was the Contractor in the said company. On the date of incident, Tara Chand was also loading the Nug with the workers, during which he slipped and fell down and the Nug also fallen down upon him, resulting death of Tara Chand at the spot itself. Police reached at the hospital and the dead body of Tara Chand was handed over to the brother of the deceased namely Bittu Ram vide memo Exh. PW2/B. 9 PW6 ASI Ram Kripal Yadav deposed that on 08.03.2007 he was on emergency duty alongwith ASI Dalel Singh and that on that day, on receipt of DD no. 4A from the duty officer, he alongwith ASI Dalel Singh, to whom the case was FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 3/7 marked, went to JPN Hospital, where the injured Tara Chand was found not fit for giving the statement. They came back to the spot i.e Vishal Roadways, Bahadurgarh Road, Sadar Bazar, where IO had prepared a rukka Ex. PW1/B and handed over the same to PW6 for registration of FIR. After registration of FIR, PW6 came back to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to the IO ASI Dalel Singh. IO took possession of tempo No. HR 63A 0673 vide memo Ex. PW6/A and of phatta, roll and rope vide memo Ex PW6/B. Accused was arrested vide memo Ex. PW6/C and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex. PW6/D. His statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C was recorded by the IO.
10 PW 7 B.S. Bhati, Record Clerk from LNJP Hospital has proved the MLC Ex. PW7/A in respect of Tara Chand, prepared by Dr. Kunal and Dr. Gaffar.
11 PW 8 Shiv Kumar Dubey deposed that he is the owner of vehicle bearing No. HR-63A-0673. He got released the vehicle on superdari and proved on record the photographs of the vehicle as Ex. PW8/A (colly.) and negatives thereof as Ex. PW8/B (colly.).
12. PW 9 Sh. B.S. Bhati, Record Clerk LNJP Hospital, Delhi has deposed that MLC bearing no. 0220052 dated 08.03.2017 of patient Tara Chand was prepared by Dr. T.B. Gaffar under the supervision of CMO Dr. Nitin and proved the same as Ex. PW7/A.
13. PW 10 SI Dalel Singh, who is the IO of the case has deposed that on 08.03.2007, on receipt of DD no. 4 B regarding admission of injured namely Tara Chand and his nephew Hukum Chand in LNJP Hospital, he along with HC Ram Kirpal reached at LNJP hospital and collected the MLC of injured Tara Chand, who was unfit for statement. He prepared rukka Ex. PW10/A and sent it to PS for registration of FIR through Ct. Ram Kirpal. On the same day, he received DD No. FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 4/7 8B Ex. PW1/C regarding death of injured Tara Chand. He thereafter added Sec. 304A in the present case and dead body was preserved in Maulana Azad Medical College. Thereafter, he came back at the spot where he met with accused Roshan Lal and the brother of deceased Tara Chand namely Bittoo and seized the tempo bearing No. HR 63A 0673 vide seizure memo Ex. PW6/A, and the wooden phatta, one plastic roll weight around 1 quintal and one rope length about 78 ft. vide seizure memo Ex. PW6/B. He recorded the statement of Bittoo as well as other witnesses and arrested the accused vide arrest memo Exh. PW6/C. He got the postmortem done and handed over the dead body to the heirs of the deceased and also collected the postmortem report Exh. PW10/X and thereafter prepared the charge sheet and filed the same in court.
14 After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused u/s 313 r/w Section 281 Cr.PC was recorded by the court in which he has stated that he is innocent and that at the instance of transport owner, who was the incharge, he has falsely been implicated in the present case. However, he has not led any evidence in his defence .
15 I have heard the arguments raised on behalf of the parties and have gone through the record carefully. After going through the complete evidence and records of this case, I am of the view that before reaching at any conclusion, relevant Sections be reproduced herein below for ready reference:
Section 304 A IPC reads as under:-
"Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine or with both."
FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 5/7 16 After going through the testimonies of all the witnesses and the material
on record, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the present case. It was alleged that it was due to negligence of the accused to take precautions while getting the rolls loaded and the rolls fell down on the deceased which resulted into his death. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused was the transport incharge. PW3 Sh. Hem Chand and PW8 Sh. Shiv Kumar Dubey has not supported the case of the prosecution. PW3 has turned hostile. He has denied the suggestion given in the cross-examination by the Ld. APP for the State that the incident of injury to Tarachand occurred due to negligence of the transport owner Roshan Lal. He further denied the suggestion given by Ld. APP for the State that Roshan lal was the transport owner. PW8 is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing No. HR 63A 0673. In the cross- examination, he has deposed that the owner of the New India Transport, Sadar Bazar, was some Pappu Chaurasia and his vehicle was hired by him. Accused Roshan Lal was not involved in any kind of transaction in respect of loading/unloading of the goods in aforesaid transport.
17 PW10 ASI Daler Singh is the IO of the present case. He deposed in the cross-examination that, "I visited the spot two/three times and also during the day for investigation but I did not find any board of any transport company. Bittoo had told me the name of the transport company. I had not served any notice upon the transport company to ascertain as to who was the owner or the supervisor of the same. 2/3 labourers and the brother of the deceased had told me that the accused was the supervisor of the transport company. I had asked a neighbouring transport company owner namely Hem Chand as to who was the supervisor and even he had named the accused. I did not collect any documentary proof/ evidence which shows as to who is the owner or supervisor of the transport company. Vol. I had recorded statement of witnesses in this regard."
FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 6/7 18 Therefore, keeping in view the testimony of the IO, it is clear the he did
not collect any documentary proof regarding the owner or supervisor of transport company. He had only recorded the statement of the witnesses, who have turned hostile regarding accused being incharge or supervisor of transport company. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the testimonies of the witnesses, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused.
19 In view of above discussion, accused Roshan Lal is acquitted of the offence u/s. 304A IPC.
Announced in the open court Today on 23rd Day of May, 2014 (Ambika Singh) Metropolitan Magistrate-06(Central) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 7/7 FIR No.:65/07 P.S.:Sadar Bazar 23.05.2014 Present: Ld. APP for the state Accused in person with counsel Vide my separate judgment of even date, accused Roshan Lal is acquitted for the offence u/s 304 A IPC.
It is prayed by the accused that for the provision of Sec. 437A Cr.P.C his previous bail bonds be extended.
Heard. His previous bail bond are extended for a period of further six months.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(AMBIKA SINGH)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi
23.05.2014
FIR No. 65/07 PS Sadar Bazar State Vs Roshan Lal 8/7