Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ghumand Singh vs State Of Punjab on 4 June, 1993
Equivalent citations: 1(1994)ACC470
JUDGMENT A.S. Nehra, J.
1. Petitioner was convicted under Section 279/304 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Moga, on 4th September, 1985.
2. The appeal of the petitioner was allowed partly. His sentence was reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine he was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months by the Sessions Judge, Faridkot, on 16.7.1986. Hence, this revision petition.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.5.1983, Bus No. PUU-7396, started from Ludhiana at 7.20 a.m. for Abohar driven by Ghumand Singh No. 145, vide duty roster copy Ex. PE, proved by Jugraj Singh, duty clerk, Punjab Roadways, Sub Depot Jagraoan (PW-2). When the said bus reached near Chuhar Chak where Unit No. 629-FR c/o 56 APO was stationed, at about 8.00 A.M., it was rashly driven by the accused, R. Madani (scapahy) driver was driving Motor Cycle BA No. 81-A 20987H.
4. The bus driven by Ghuman Singh hit against the Motor Cycle. Subedar Shishpal (PW-4) was at a distance of 20 yards and was sitting by the side of the Camp. Mithu Singh (PW-6), was the sentry on duty on that day. As soon as R. Madani was hit by the bus he suffered injuries. After leaving Mithu Singh to watch the bus, and the motor-cycle, Subedar Shish Pal (PW4), took the injured to Civil Hospital, Jagroan, and got him admitted there, who succumed to his injuries at 10.30 a.m. the matter was reported to Jagraon Police. He was directed to report to Mehna. Subedar Shishpal (PW-4) made his statement Ex. PC. It was read over and explained to him. HC Kuldeep Singh (PW-8), made endst. Ex. PG/1. Earlier, he received intimation Ex. PB, from Civil Hospital, Jagraon. On the basis of above said, formal FIR Ex. PG/2 was recorded by LC Gurbachan Singh. HC Kuldip Singh (PW-8), proceeded to the hospital and prepared inquest report Ex. PF. He also took into possession the clothes vide memo Ex. PK. He proceeded to the spot and took into possession broken pieces of glass of the bus and parts of motor cycle vide memo Ex.PL. he also prepared rough site plan, Ex. PM. of the place of occurrence.
5. On 16.5.1983, Dr. R.K. Garg Medical Officer Incharge Civil Hospital, Jagraon, (PW-1), sent intimation Ex. PA to SHO Jagraon regarding the arrival of R.I. Madani. On the death of R.I. Madani he sent intimation, Ex. PB. On the same day at about 3.00 P.M. he conducted the post-mortem on the dead body of R.I. Madani and noted 21 injuries on the dead body. In his opinion, death was due to shock and haemorrhage, as a result of all the injuries collectively which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The injuries were ante-mortem in nature.
The probable time between the injuries and death was about three hours and between death and post-mortem four hours and thirty minutes. Ex. PC is the correct carbon copy of the post-mortem report. The police made request, Ex. PD for post-mortem.
6. On the same day, Janak Raj Mechanic Punjab Roadways Moga, (PW-3), tested bus No. PUU-7396 and gave his report, Ex. PF. According to him the foot brakes of the bus had failed and on account of pressure, the washer of the master-cylinder had been torn. Baljinder Singh (PW-7), took into possession driving licence Ex.P-1 and registration certificate, Ex. P-2, vide memo Ex.PJ.
7. In his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused denied the case against him. So much so he did not admit that he was the driver of bus No. 7396 and claimed himself to be innocent, however, he stated that he was driving his vehicle at a speed of 40/45 kilometers per hour. He further stated that Military convoy, was going from Jagraon to Moga, that he had crossed 20/25 vehicles of the convoy; that in the meantime from his left side suddenly a motor cycle appeared; that in order to save him he took his vehicle to the extreme right; that on account of this reason his brakes failed and the motor cycle driver struck against his left side wheel and fell down; that the bus stopped in the ditches; that in the meantime military people arrived there and took him in the ambulance. In his defence, he examined Piara Singh DW-1 who also deposed that military convoy was going; that a motor cycle appeared suddenly and that in order to save him the accident took place.
8. It is clear from the statement of Jugraj Singh duty clerk P: 2 who produced roster, copy Ex.PE, that the petitioner was the driver No. 145 and took bus No. PUU-7396 at 7.20 A.M. Petitioner was arrested at the spot. It is clear from photograph negative Ex. PG/1 Ex. PG/4 and photographs Ex. PG/5 to. Ex. PG/8 prepared by Raghbir Singh, that the bus was taken into possession from the spot. It is clear from the roster that the petitioner was driving the said bus.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that both the witnesses of occurrence were not present at the time of the occurrence and that they were in the camp and they had not seen the occurrence and they were made up witnesses and their evidence is not worth acceptance. So far as the evidence of PW 4-Shishpal is concerned, there is nothing do discredit it. He has very clearly stated that he was only at a distance of 20 yards from the place of occurrence at the camp of the Army and he just came to the place of occurrence and saw the occurrence. He gave information to the police without much delay as his statement was recorded at 1 P.M. He had taken the injured to Jagraon Hospital. He stated that the petitioner was driving bus No. PUU 7396 at a very high speed at 70 kilometers per hour. The number of the bus and the name of the petitioner driving it find mention in the First Information Report itself. PW 4 also stated that the motorcycle was on the extreme left side of the road while the bus went on the wrong side to that place hitting it, though, the width of the road there was about 30 feet. The evidence of PW 4 could not be shattered on any worth consideration point. Mere statement of PW 4 that he was at the camp cannot be of any help to the petitioner as PW 4 has explained that their camp was just adjoining the road and he was at a distance of 20 Yards from the place of occurrence at the workshop of the camp which was open. Thus, there could not be obstruction for him from seeing the occurrence. PW 4 has got no motive to depose against the petitioner for his false implication. His evidence is sufficient to establish the case of the prosecution. PW 6 Mithu Singh Sepoy, no doubt, gave wrong distance stating that their camp was about 11/2 kilometers and Subedar Shishpal was at a distance of 60 meters from him and that he was about 350 meters from the place of accident, but he admitted that he does not know that what is length of a meter and how many meters are in one kilometer. So, he seems to be altogether ignorant in that respect. However, even if his evidence is excluded, it makes no difference as the evidence of the other witness Subedar Shishpal has been found to be reliable.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the statement of the petitioner wherein he has stated that a Military Convoy was going from Jagraon to Moga and he had crossed about 20 vehicles of the Convoy and in the meantime, motorcycle suddenly appeared from his left side and in order to save it, he took his vehicle to the extreme right side of the road and brakes of the bus failed and motor cycle struck against the left side of the bus and fell down, the bus stopped in the ditches. This version is not at all supported from any material on the record or any circumstance. The statement of defence-witness Piara Singh cannot be accepted as he does not appear to be even present at the time of occurrence. The bus went to the wrong side of the road to its extreme where the motor-cycle was going to its extreme left side of the road. The petitioner has not been able to explain the taking of the bus to the extreme wrong side. The statement of PW-3 Janak Raj, Mechanic, that food-brakes failed due to the applying of the force on the brakes and that the head-lights were properly working, cannot be of much help to the accused to escape from the liability.
11. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is employed with the Punjab Roadways as driver; that he had no ill-will or enmity with the deceased and that he may lose his job because of the imprisonment. It was further submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner may be released on probation of good conduct after taking into consideration his age, character and antecedents and the circumstances of the case.
12. The petitioner is not a previous convict. He is employed with the Punjab Roadways and he may lose his job in case the sentence of his imprisonment is maintained.
13. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it a fit case where the petitioner should be released on probation of good conduct. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner is maintained, but his sentence of imprisonment and fine is set aside and, in case the petitioner deposits Rs. 10,000/- as compensation to be paid to the heirs of R. Madani deceased, in the Trial Court within four months fron today. He shall be released on probation of good conduct under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act subject to his furnishing adequate surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, undertaking to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon during a period of two years and, in the meantime, to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. In case the petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs. 10,000/- in the Trial Court within the stipulated period of four months from to day, then the will undergo the remaining sentence of imprisonment as directed by the Court below.
The revision petition is partly allowed, as indicated above.