Delhi District Court
State vs . Ashok Kumar on 16 March, 2015
FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015 IN THE COURT OF SH. POORAN CHAND: CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: CENTRAL DISTRICT: TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI FIR No.: 329/04 PS: DBG Road U/s 287/337 IPC State Vs. Ashok Kumar Unique ID No.: 02401R1326272008 J U D G M E N T:
______________________________________________________________
(a) S.No. of the case : 73/2
(b) Name of complainant : Sh. Jamalludin S/o Sh.
Shamsuddin R/o C9D/310, J. J.
Colony, Bawana, Delhi.
(c) Date of commission of offence : 02.10.2004
(d) Name of the accused : Ashok Kumar
S/o Sh. Inder Singh
R/o H. No. 217, MCD Colony,
Samaypur Badli, Delhi42.
(e) Offence complained of : U/s 287/338 IPC
(f) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final arguments heard on : 16.03.2015
(h) Final Order : Acquitted
(i) Date of such order : 16.03.2015
State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 1 of 7
FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015
BRIEF FACTS & REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
1. The facts of the case in brief as borne out from the record are that on 02.10.2004 at about 12.30 pm, at Koora Khana, Manakpura, Delhi within the jurisdiction of Police Station DBG Road, acted with the machinery i.e. a truck used for the purpose of picking dustbins, in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life or to be likely to cause hurt or injury and thus cause grievous injury to Jamaluddin S/o Sh. Shamsuddin, when cap of one dustbin opened by his negligence. Further accused caused grievous hurt by doing aforesaid act so rashly and negligently so as to endanger human life or personal safety of others. Complainant made a complaint to the police on the basis of which FIR in the matter was registered. Thereafter, after completion of necessary formalities, chargesheet in the matter was filed before the Court through concerned SHO.
2. After completion of investigation, accused stood chargesheeted for offences punishable u/s 287/338 IPC.
3. After filing of the charge sheet in the case, accused was supplied the documents in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C and after hearing arguments, vide order dated 01.08.2006, Notice in terms of Section 251 CrPC for offences punishable u/s 287/338 IPC was served upon the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 2 of 7 FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015
4. In order to prove charges against accused, the prosecution examined three witnesses whereafter the PE in the matter was closed as prosecution failed to produce its material witnesses including the injured herein. Thus, recording of statement of accused u/s 281 Cr.P.C was dispensed with.
5. Before embarking upon appreciating the arguments advanced at Bar, it would be appropriate to have a brief scrutiny of the evidences recorded in the matter.
6. PW1 HC Khurshid Ali deposed that on 02.10.2004, on receipt of DD No. 12, he alongwith HC Brij Lal went to the spot situated at Koora Khata, Manakpura, where on MCD vehicle for the purpose of collecting garbage alongwith its driver Ashok Kumar were there. Injured was reported to be taken to Jeewan Mala Hospital. On the direction of IO, he remained at the spot and he went to hospital. On his return, he gave a rukka to him and he got the present case registered from Police Station on the basis of said rukka. On his return to the spot, he gave copy of FIR and said rukka to HC Brij Lal for investigation. The said MCD vehicle was seized by IO vide memo Ex. PW1/A. The driving licence of accused and documents of vehicle were also seized by IO vide memo Ex. PW1/B and Ex. PW1/C. The driver was arrested and his personal search conducted vide memos Ex. PW1/D and Ex. PW1/E. He was released on police bail on presenting surety. The vehicle was State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 3 of 7 FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015 deposited in malkhana of Police Station. IO had recorded his statement. IO had also prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence.
Cross examination of this witness was recorded as NIL despite being afforded opportunity to this effect.
7. PW2 Sh. T U Siddiuqi deposed that on 13.10.2004, on request of IO, he conducted mechanical inspection of MCD truck number DL1M1298. After conducting mechanical inspection, he found that the vehicle was fit for road test. His detailed report is Ex. PW2/A. Cross examination of this witness was recorded as NIL despite being afforded opportunity to this effect.
8. PW3 ASI Brij Lal deposed that on 02.10.2004, on receipt of DD No. 12 regarding accident, he alongwith Ct. Khurshid Ali reached at the spot i.e. Kudda Khata, Manakpura, where they found one vehicle bearing No. DL1M1298 and they came to know that injured was taken to hospital. He went to hospital after leaving Ct. Khurshid at the spot where he obtained the MLC of injured Jamalludin. He recorded his statement Ex. PW3/A. He returned to the spot alongwith complainant, prepared tehrir Ex. PW3/B and gave it to Ct. Khurshid for registration of FIR, who went to the Police Station and after getting FIR Ex. PW3/C returned to the spot. In the meantime, accused reached at the spot and he was identified by the complainant/injured. He prepared site plan Ex. PW3/D at the instance of the complainant. Truck State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 4 of 7 FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015 was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/A. After interrogation, accused was arrested and his personal search was carried out vide memo Ex. PW1/D and Ex. PW1/E. Driving licence of accused and photocopy of offending vehicle were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/B and Ex. PW1/C. Accused was released on bail. During investigation, vehicle was mechanically inspected vide memo Ex. PW2/A. After completion of investigation, he prepared challan and submitted in the Court through SHO.
Cross examination of this witness was recorded as NIL despite being afforded opportunity to this effect.
9. This is all as far as prosecution evidence is concerned. The accused did not examine any witness in defense.
Arguments advanced & Case law cited:
10. The learned defence counsel has very vehemently argued that the case of prosecution rests entirely upon the testimony of police witnesses and there is no independent corroboration thereof. It is further argued that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt by not examining its prime/star witness i.e. injured/complainant Jamaluddin who is the best person to disclose the happening of event in correct manner. By not examining the injured, case of the prosecution stands demolishes. State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 5 of 7 FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015
11. On the other hand, Ld. Additional PP has very vehemently argued that though the injured could not be examined in the matter, however there are sufficient material on record to prove the guilt of the accused.
Court View & Final Decision:
12. In the present matter, accused is charged for offences punishable u/s 287/338 IPC for causing hurt to the injured Sh. Jamaluddin through the offending vehicle while driving in a rash and negligent manner. To substantiate its case, prosecution was under the statutory obligation to prove the factum of occurrence of accident and receiving injuries upon the person of injured. The material eye witness/injured who was cited by the prosecution for proving their case was PW/injured Jamaluddin. The said witness was not traceable as per the report filed by ACP. The other remaining witnesses cited or examined by the prosecution are formal witnesses only. The testimonies of said witnesses are of no use as far as the identification of the driver of offending vehicle is concerned or that of proving rashness or negligence on the part of accused the driver of offending vehicle is concerned.
13. Keeping in view the above stated facts and circumstances, Court is of the view that prosecution has failed to discharge its burden of proving its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused and there is no evidence on record to connect the charges levelled against the accused. Thus accused is State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 6 of 7 FIR NO. 329/04; PS DBG Road ; U/s 287/338 IPC DOD: 16.03.2015 entitled for the benefit of doubt. Accordingly, accused Ashok Kumar is acquitted in the matter.
Announced in the open court (Pooran Chand)
on 16.03.2015 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate:
Central District:Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi
State V/s Ashok Kumar ("Acquitted") Page 7 of 7