Delhi District Court
State vs Netra Pal on 22 April, 2025
IN THE COURT OF PREETI:
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS - 03 (CENTRAL)
TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI
State Vs. : Netra Pal
FIR No : 184/2018
U/s : 279/337/304-A IPC and 3/181 MV Act
P.S. : I.P. Estate
JUDGMENT:
1. Criminal Case No. : 8711/2019 2. Date of commission of offence : 22.07.2018 3. Date of institution of the case : 03.07.2019 4. Name of the complainant : Sh. Sanjeev Gupta 5. Name of accused, parentage & : Netra Pal S/o Sh. Mangat Sen 6. Offense complained or proved : U/s 279/337/304-A IPC and 3/181 MV Act 7. Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty 8. Date on which order was reserved : 17.04.2025 9. Final order : Acquitted 10. Date of final order : 22.04.2025
1. The accused is facing trial for offences u/s 279/337/338/304-A IPC and 3/181 MV Act. The genesis of the prosecution story is that on 22.07.2018 at about 11:45 am at BSZ Marg, Indian Express Building, Delhi accused was found driving e rickshaw bearing no. DL-5ER-4606 in rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety. While driving the said vehicle in the negligent manner, accused caused simple injury to Smt. Alka Devi, Baby Dewanshi, Manoj Gupta and complainant Sanjeev Gupta and Sh. Ram Avtar Gupta died due to the injury received. Thereafter, the alleged offending vehicle was taken into possession by the police after which its mechanical inspection was conducted. It is stated in the chargesheet that the alleged offending vehicle was being driven by accused at the relevant time. After completion of investigation, the chargesheet for offences u/s 279/337/304-A IPC and 3/181 MV Act was submitted for trial of accused.
FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 1 of 82. After taking cognizance of the offences, the copy of charge-sheet was supplied to accused in compliance of section 207 Cr.P.C. the arguments on charges were heard and charges for offences u/s 279/337/338/304-A IPC and 3/181 MV Act were framed against accused. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. However, accused pleaded guilty for the offence punishable u/s 3/181 MV Act. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was led.
3. The accused also admitted factum of registration of FIR No. 184/18 PS I.P. Estate Ex. A1, certificate u/s 65 B evidence Act Ex. A2, DD No. 22A dated 22.07.2018 Ex. A3, DD No. 21PP dated 25.07.2018 Ex. A4, DD No. 3A already Ex. PW7/A, PM report Ex. A5(Colly), MLC No. 112101008 dated 22.07.2018 Ex. A6, MLC No. 112101010 Ex. A7, MLC No. 112101031 already Ex. PW8/A, MLC No. 112101078 Ex. A8, mechanical inspection report Ex. A9 u/s 330 BNSS and the concerned witnesses were deleted from the list of witnesses.
4. In order to establish guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined eight witnesses in all.
4.1. PW-1 is Sh. Sanjeev Gupta who deposed that on 22.07.2018, he alongwith his father namely Ram Avtar Gupta, mother namely Alka Devi, younger brother namely Manoj(deceased), wife namely Guddi aged 25 years and daughters namely Pari aged 3 years and Devanshi aged 2 years were going to Kalkaji Mandir by e-rickshaw owned and driven by Netra Pal who was his neighbor and uncle. When they reached Delhi Gate near Indian Express building, suddenly the e-rickshaw turned over and all the passengers (mother, wife, younger brother, daughters, neighbor uncle) got injured but his father was seriously injured. He alongwith his younger brother took his father to Lok Nayak Hospital, where he was medically examined/treated. That on 25.07.2018, his father got expired during night around 06:00 pm at Lok Nayak Hospital. He filed a complaint and the copy of Complaint. This witness was cross- examined by Ld. APP for the State and Ld. LAC for defence.
4.2. PW-2 is ASI Ashutosh who deposed that on 22.07.2018, he was posted at PS IP Estate, as HC. On that day he received DD No. 22718 regarding the admission of FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 2 of 8 injured person in LNJP Hospital. He alongwith Ct. Summy went to Hospital where injured person namely Ramavatar Gupta, Smt. Alka Gupta, Netra Pal, Pari and Riya were found admitted in the hospital. He collected the MLCs of all injured persons. Complainant Sanjeev Gupta, eye witness of accident was present there and he got recorded his statement. He prepared Rukka. He gave Rukka to Ct. Ramesh, who went to PS and got registered the FIR. After registration of the FIR, the further investigation was marked to ASI Sh. Swatantra Kumar. He handed over the documents to him. ASI Swatantra Kumar further investigated the case and during investigation, he alongwith complainant and IO went to spot. IO inspected the site and prepared site plan. The e-rickshaw bearing No. DL5ER4606 was taken into possession. The RC and Insurance of e-rickshaw were seized. IO seized the blood sample. IO got preserved the dead body in mortuary and thereafter, postmortem was conducted on the body of deceased. After postmortem, dead body was handed over to legal heirs of deceased. The accused Netra Pal was arrested. The photographs of spot were got clicked by IO. This witness was cross-examined by Ld. LAC for defence.
4.3. PW-3 is Sh. Deepak Kumar Gupta who deposed that deceased Ram Avtar Gupta was his uncle. On 22.07.2018, he alongwith his family members Alka Devi, Sanjay Gupta, Guddi etc. had gone to Kalka ji, Mandir in a E-rickshaw owned by the accused Netra Pal. When they were near Indian Express Building, Delhi Gate the e- rickshaw turned tilted and they sustained injuries. His uncle Ram Avtar Gupta expired during treatment. Postmortem was conducted on the body of deceased Ram Kumar Gupta. He identified the dead body of deceased Ram Avtar Gupta in the mortuary. After postmortem dead body was handed over to LRs. Police recorded his statement. This witness was cross-examined by Ld. LAC for defence.
4.4. PW-4 is Smt. Alka who deposed that accused Netra Pal was known to her as he was her neighbor and used to drive e-rickshaw. She was 5 th Passed. On 22.07.2018, she alongwith her husband, her son Sanjeev and his wife Guddi and daughter of accused were going to Kalkaji Mandir in the e-rickshaw which was driving by accused. When they reached in front of express building, BSZ Marg, the e-rickshaw FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 3 of 8 struck with road divider. As a result of which e-rickshaw turned tilted and they all sustained injuries. Due to the lapse of long period, she did not remember the number of e-rickshaw, however, she told the same at that time. Due to sustaining injuries in the said accident, her husband expired. This witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for the State and Ld. LAC for defence.
4.5. PW-5 is HC Summey Panwar who deposed that on 22.07.2018, he was posted at P.S. I.P.Estate as Ct. On that day he alongwith HC Ashutosh reached at LNJP Hospital where IO/HC Ashutosh collected the MLCs of injured persons Ram Avtar Gupta, Alka Gupta, Riya, Netra Pal and Pari who sustained injuries while they were traveling in e-rickshaw and it was turned tilted hitting with road divider. HC Ashutosh asked the injured persons to give their statement but they did not give the same due to suffering from pain. This witness was not cross-examined by Ld. LAC for defence.
4.6. PW-6 is Retired SI Raj Kumar who deposed that on 25.07.2018, he was posted at MACT, Central Delhi as SI. He received the case file for further investigation. He served notice u/s 133 MV Act to the registered owner of offending E rickshaw. He replied the same vide Ex. PW6/B from Point X to X1 stating that on 22.07.2018, at about 11:45 AM he was driving the offending E rickshaw bearing no. 5ER-4606 at the time of accident. He got mechanically inspected the offending e rickshaw. He got verified parcha 12. He got verified the documents of E rickshaw. The accused was not having proper DL at the time of accident. He added the section 3/181 MV Act. He obtained the nature of injury on the MLCs which were opined simple. Statement of witnesses were recorded. After completion of investigation chargesheet was filed. This witness was cross-examined by Ld. LAC for defence.
4.7. PW-7 is ASI Swatanter Kumar who deposed that on 25.07.2018, he was posted as ASI at P.S. I.P.Estate. He received DD no. 3 A informing that the injured namely Ram Avtar had died in LNJP Hospital. He alongwith HC Ashutosh went to the mortuary Mulana Azad Medical College. On reaching there he got conducted the postmortem of the injured. Thereafter, he seized the blood sample of the injured and the sample seal. The dead body of the deceased was handed over to his son namely Sanjiv Gupta/complainant. on 25.07.2018, they went to the spot alongwith Sanjiv FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 4 of 8 Gupta and he prepared site plan at his instance. The accused came to the P.S. and after enquiry he formally arrested him and also personally searched him. The accused was released on furnishing personal bail bond. He had also seized the e- rickshaw/offfending vehicle. He informed about the incident in MACT Cell. This witness was cross-examined by Ld. LAC for defence.
4.8. PW-8 is Smt. Guddi who deposed that on 22.07.2018, he alongwith his family members were going to Kalkaji Temple in E-rickshaw. The e-rickshaw got unbalanced because of the holes on the road and thereafter it fell down. They all got anxious and everybody started crying and he saw his father in law/deceased got severally injured and blood was oozing out from one of his legs. Thereafter they all went to the hospital and they were admitted in the hospital. In the hospital, his statement was also recorded by the police officials. The accused namely Netra Pal was driving the said e-rickshaw. From the hospital, he alongwith his children went to our house. This witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for the State and by Ld. LAC for defence.
5. Thereafter, the PE was closed. Statement of accused was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C, wherein he denied all the allegations and pleaded innocence. He further stated that he was not driving the e-rickshaw negligently and the e-rickshaw turned due to jerk. No DE was led despite opportunity and matter was fixed for Final Arguments.
6. I have heard the submissions addressed by the Learned APP for state and Ld. defence counsel for accused and carefully perused the documents on record.
7. Ld. LAC for accused has argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts. She submits that seizure memo, site plan, arrest memo are not signed by any witness. She further argued that testimony of public witnesses is not favour of prosecution. With these submissions, it is prayed that accused be given benefit of doubt and accordingly be acquitted.
8. On the other hand, Ld. APP has submitted that the prosecution has successfully FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 5 of 8 proved its case against the accused and he is liable to be convicted for the offence alleged.
9. To bring home the guilt of rash and negligent driving to the accused, three things need to be proved by the prosecution that too beyond any reasonable doubt. The three essential ingredients are as follows:-
1. That the accident actually took place.
2. That the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving.
3. That the accused was the person who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time.
10. Before proceeding further, let us discuss the meaning of the expressions "rash" and "negligent". These words i.e "rash" and "negligent", have not been defined in the Indian Penal Code. However as per Black's Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition, the word 'Negligent' is characterized by a person's failure to exercise the degree of care that someone of ordinary prudence would have exercised in the same circumstances.
11. The terminology of criminal negligence has been discussed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "S.N. Hussain v. State of Andhra Pradesh", AIR 1972 SC 685 as under :
"Criminal negligence on the other hand, is the gross and culpable neglect or failure to exercise that reasonable and proper care and precaution to guard against injury either to the public generally or to an individual in particular, which, having regard to all the circumstance out of which the charge has arisen. It was the imperative duty of the accused person to have adopted............ Culpable negligence lies in the failure to exercise reasonable and proper care and the extent of its reasonableness will always depend upon the circumstances of each case".
12. In the case at hand, it has been admitted by the accused that he was driving the e-rickshaw no. DL-5ER-4606 on the alleged date, time and place. However, he only denied that he was driving the vehicle in rash and negligent manner. Since the factum FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 6 of 8 of accident has not been disputed by the accused nor has he disputed his identity or that of the above said vehicle, hence, the only question before the court is whether the accused was driving the e-rickshaw in a rash and negligent manner, and had caused injuries to injured persons and due to his negligence, deceased Ram Avtar got expired.
13. Perusal of the original complaint Ex. PW1/A reveals that on the given date and time complainant alongwith his family member was going on the offending e- rickshaw and when the e-rickshaw reached at Indian Express Building it got turned over due to which they got injured. It is averred that the accident took place due to the negligent driving of accused. However, in the deposition before court, PW-1 Sanjeev Gupta deposed that suddenly the e-rickshaw turned over and all the passengers got injured. He did not depose that the e-rickshaw turned over due to the rash driving by accused. PW-4 Alka and PW-8 Guddi are also the eye witnesses. PW-4 Alka deposed that the e-rickshaw struck with road divider due to which the e- rickshaw got turned over and they got injured. She did not depose that the accident took place due to negligent driving of accused. She was cross-examined by Ld. APP for the State and in the cross-examination she denied the suggestion given by Ld. APP for the State that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of accused.
14. Similarly, PW-8 Guddi contradicted herself by saying that the accident happened as accused was driving e-rickshaw in a rash and negligent manner, while cross-examination by Ld. APP for the State but stated that the rickshaw got unbalanced because of the holes on the road, while cross-examination by Ld. LAC. Therefore, her testimony cannot be relied upon. There is no other eye witness available on record. All the eye witnesses turned hostile and did not depose anything in favour of prosecution. The allegations of driving the e-rickshaw negligently have remained unproved.
15. In nutshell, from the testimonies of public witnesses examined by the FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 7 of 8 prosecution, the alleged occurrence of accident due to rash or negligent act of the accused stands not proved and as such the liability for the alleged offences cannot be fastened on the accused. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the prosecution has failed to establish beyond all reasonable doubts that on the given date, time and place, the accused was driving the vehicle no. DL-5ER-4606 in a rash or negligent manner so as to endanger human life or public safety of others, therefore, accused deserves to be acquitted for offence u/s 279 IPC. The prosecution has also failed to establish beyond all reasonable doubts that on the given, date, time and place, due to rash and negligent driving of the accused, victim incurred grievous injury and Sh. Ram Avtar got expired. Therefore, the accused also deserves to be acquitted for offence u/s 337/338/304-A IPC. The accused Netra Pal is accordingly acquitted for offences u/s 279/337/338/304-A IPC.
16. The bail bonds, if any furnished by accused at the time of commencement of trail stands canceled. Surety, if any stands discharged. Documents, if any shall be returned to its rightful owner as per rules. Endorsement, if any stands canceled. Case property if any, shall be disposed off after expiration of period to assail this judgment and in case of appeal, as per the directions of Ld. Appellate Court. Case file be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed by PREETIPREETI Date: 2025.04.22 16:37:33 +0545 Announced in the open court (PREETI) on 22nd day of April, 2025 JMFC-03(Central),THC,Delhi FIR No. 184/2018 P.S. IP Estate State Vs. Netra Pal Page 8 of 8