Delhi District Court
State vs . Ajit Singh on 23 April, 2015
FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015 IN THE COURT OF POORAN CHAND: CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: CENTRAL DISTRICT: TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI FIR No.: 51/04 PS D.B.G Road U/s 279/304A IPC State Vs. Ajit Singh Unique ID No.: 02401R01345332008 J U D G M E N T:
______________________________________________________________
(a) S.No. of the case : 292/2
(b) Name of complainant : SI H.N Giri, PS DBG Road
(c) Date of commission of offence : 12.02.2004
(d) Name of the accused : (1) Ajit Singh S/o Sh. Ram Singh, R/o House No. 73, Veena Enclave, Nangloi, Delhi : (2) Sunil Kumar @ Bablu s/o Sh Duli Chand R/o Village Sangroh, PS Bassi, Distt. Hamirpur, H.P. ( already convicted through plead guilty vide order dated 11.07.13)
(e) Offence complained of : U/s 279/304A IPC
(f) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
(g) Final arguments heard on : 23.04.2015 State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 1 of 7 FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015
(h) Final Order : Acquitted
(i) Date of such order : 23.04.2015 BRIEF FACTS & REASONS FOR SUCH DECISION:
1. The facts of the case in brief are that on 17.08.2004, upon receipt of DD no.6A regarding some road accident, SI H.N Giri with Ct.
Sunder Pal went to the spot Faiz Road, DBG Road crossing where they found one DTC bus no DL1PB-5036 and truck no. HR-38H-5725 at the spot in accidental condition. One lady namely Smt Krishna Devi was also found lying unconscious in front of the DTC bus. One persons Satish son of said lady was also present at the spot. Thereafter, IO called the ambulance and said lady was removed to the Lady Harding Hospital. No eye witness was found at the spot. With the help of crane, vehicles were taken aside. Thereafter, IO along with Ct. Sunder Pal reached at the hospital where they were informed by the doctor that the said lady was already dead "brought dead". In the hospital also, no eye-witness could be found. After some time, IO prepared tehrir and on the basis of which present FIR was registered. Thereafter, both the accused namely Ajit Singh and Sunil were apprehended and arrested in the matter. After completion of necessary investigation, IO prepared the challan and filed the same before the Court.
2. After completion of investigation, accused stood chargesheeted for offences punishable u/s 279/304-A IPC. Accused were summoned and were supplied the documents in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. Arguments were heard on behalf of both the accused. Vide order dated 05.05.2010, notice in terms of Section 251 CrPC for offences punishable u/s 304-A IPC was served upon the accused Ajit Singh, to which he pleaded not State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 2 of 7 FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015 guilty and claimed trial. Vide order dated 28.04.2010, notice in terms of Section 251 CrPC for offences punishable u/s 279/304-A IPC was served upon the accused Sunil Kumar, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to prove charges against accused, the prosecution has cited fourteen witnesses out of which eight witnesses were examined. Four witnesses who were cited as stat witnesses namely Harvansh Singh, Daya Ram, Satish Kumar and Dinesh Yadav. During trial, witnesses Harvansh Singh and Daya Ram expired. PE in the matter was closed and statement of accused u/s 281 r/w S. 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein he stated that he was falsely implicated in the present matter.
4. PW1 Sh Satish Kumar is the son of the deceased who deposed that he along with his mother deceased went to his sister's place by foot through via Jhandewalan, in front of Prahlad restaurant. He stopped at paan shop and his mother went ahead about 25 steps. At around 6.30 am, there was collision between one bus and truck at Faiz Road crossing, as at that time there was no traffic on the road and both the drivers of the aforesaid vehicles were in hurry. He further deposed that his mother came under the front wheel (steering side) of the said bus. In the meanwhile, his brother Chander Mohan also reached at the spot. His mother got injuries on her right hand side stomach and her backbone got fractured. In the meanwhile, ambulance came and his mother was taken to Lady Hardinge Hospital where she was declared brought dead. He correctly identified the photographs of bus and truck in accidental condition.
5. PW-2 Chander Mohan is the son of deceased and brother of PW-1. He did not witness the accident. He deposed that he did not remember the date, month or year but it was winter season. About nine years back, when he was sleeping, his friend informed him about the accident of his State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 3 of 7 FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015 mother, he reached at the spot and found his mother lying in between front tyre of one DTC bus. He also identified the photographs of the two vehicles.
6. PW-3 is MVI T.U Siddiqui who has mechanically inspected one TATA truck bearing No. HR 38H 5725 and proved his report Ex.PW3/A.
7. PW-4 HC Gobind Ram was the photographer of Delhi Police who clicked the photographs Ex.PW4/1 to Ex.PW4/20 and negatives Ex.PA of the vehicles TATA truck and DTC bus.
8. PW-5 Sh Dinesh Yadav is another star witness of the prosecution. He deposed that on 12.02.14, he was going to Peeragarhi from New Delhi Railway Station in bus No. DL 1PB 5036 which was being driven by acused Ajeet Singh, present in the court (correctly identified). The bus had started at abut 6.25 AM and when it reached at the crossing of Faiz Road one truck was coming from the side of Dhaula Kuan. The said truck was bearing registration no. HR38 H 5725. The said truck hit the bus and and due to its impact, the bus turned towards right side. He had fallen on the floor of the bus from the seat due to sudden hit. He came to know that one woman was crushed under the bus due to the accident. The accident had taken place due to fault of the driver of bus as well as of the truck, however, both the drivers were driving their vehicles in proper manner. After 10-15 minutes police came there. He did not remember if the drivers of both vehicles were present at the spot when police reached. He had got his address noted down to the police official and had left from the spot. However, this witness turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case and was cross examined by Ld. APP for the State. In his cross examination, this witness denied all the suggestions given by Ld. APP for the State and completely resiled from his statement given to the police u/s 161 Cr.P.C.
State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 4 of 7FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015
9. PW-6 Sh Ved Pal is a formal witness from DTC department who has proved the duty slip in respect of accused Ajit Singh as Ex.PW6/A . He further proved the seizure memo Ex.PW5/C vide which documents of the DTC bus were taken into possession.
10. PW-7 ASI Satish is the duty office on the relevant date and time who proved the recording of FIR in the matter. He proved his endorsement on the rukka as Ex.PW7/B and copy of FIR as Ex.PW7/A.
11. PW-8 HC Sunder Pal deposed that on 12.02.2004, he was posted at PS DBG Road and on that day on receipt of DD No. 6A, he along with SI H.N. Giri went to the spot Faiz Road, DBG Road crossing where they found one DTC bus no DL1PB-5036 and truck no. HR-38H-5725 at the spot. One lady was also lying on the patri near the vehicle. One person namely Satish son of said lady was also present at the spot. IO with the help said Satish sent injured lady to hospital. Photographer was called who took the photographs. With the help of crane vehicles were taken aside. IO left him at the spot and went to hospital. After some time he returned and gave me tehrir for registration of FIR. He went to PS and after getting registered the FIR, returned to the spot with the copy of FIR and original tehrir and same were handed over to IO. Both the vehicles were taken into possession vide seizure memos Ex. PW8/A and PW8/B, both bearing my signatures at point A. I along with IO went to mortuary. After postmortem we returned to the PS. Both accused met them in the PS, after interrogation, IO arrested both the accused vide memo Ex. PW5/E and Ex. PW5/F and thereafter their personal searches were carried out vide memos Ex. PW5/G and H. IO also seized the D/L of the accused vide memo Ex. PW5/A and Ex. PW5/B, bearing his signatures at point B.
12. I have gone through the evidence led by the prosecution and State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 5 of 7 FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015 have also perused the other documentary evidence proved in the case.
13. The learned defence counsel has argued that the none of the prosecution witnesses has supported the case of the prosecution and hence, accused deserves to be acquitted.
14. Per contra, the learned APP has argued that the accident in the matter took place because of fault of the accused, who was driving the offending vehicle at the time of accident.
15. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at bar. In the present case, accused is charged for the offences u/s 279/304A IPC and the prosecution is under duty to prove the following issues to prove the guilt of the accused.
I. whether the offending vehicle i.e the bus bearing registration No. DL IPB 5036 was being driven by accused?
II. whether the accident was caused by the offending vehicle by colliding with truck bearing registration no. HR-38H-5725 III. whether the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the bus?
16. I shall decide issue no. I and II simultaneously.
17. In order to prove its case, prosecution has examined eight witnesses out of which PW-5 Dinesh Yadav, passenger in the said bus examined as an eye witness. I have gone through the testimony of this witness who has categorically deposed that he had boarded the offending vehicle driven by accused on 12.02.2014 at about 6.25 am and a truck which was coming from Dhaula Kuan side hit the bus and due to the impact, this witness had fallen on the floor of the bus and the bus also turned on the right side. Accused has been identified by this witness correctly. Hence, in view of the testimony of this witness, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the offending vehicle bearing registration No. DL IPB 5036 was being driven by State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 6 of 7 FIR NO. 51/04; PS DBG Road; U/s 279/304A IPC DOD:23.04.2015 the accused at the time of accident and accident was caused by truck which hit the bus on the road. Accordingly, issue no. I and II is decided in favour of the prosecution.
18. So far as issue no. III whether the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the bus is concerned, PW-6 further deposed that the accident has taken place due to fault of the driver of bus as well as of the truck. He further deposed that both the drivers were driving their vehicles in proper manner. From this piece of evidence, it cannot be held that accused was negligent in driving the bus. Rather, from the testimony of this witness, the indication is towards the negligence on the part of the driver of truck. It is also pertinent to mention that witness did not support the case of the prosecution and he was declared hostile by Ld. Addl. PP for the State. Even despite declaring the witness hostile, he did not support the case of the prosecution. There is no other evidence on record which can attribute the negligence on the part of accused. Accordingly, this issue is decided against the prosecution.
19. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, it is held that prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the accused Ajit Singh. Accordingly, accused Ajit Singh stands acquitted. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (Pooran Chand)
on 23.04.2015 Chief Metropolitan Magistrate:
Central District:Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi
State V/s Ajit Singh ("acquitted") Page 7 of 7