Delhi District Court
State vs . Deva Singh on 1 September, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SATISH KUMAR ARORA :
CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE :
DWARKA COURTS : DELHI
State Vs. Deva Singh
FIR No: 623/03
PS: Najafgarh
U/s : 279/304A IPC
JUDGMENT
a) Sl. No. of the case : 503/02
b) Date of commission of : 03.11.2003
offence
c) Name of the complainant : Ashok Kumar,
s/o Sh. Ram Kalan Yadav,
r/o Vill. Paprawat,
Najafgarh, New Delhi
through State.
d) Name of the accused, his parentage : Deva Singh,
and residence s/o Sh. Hari Singh,
r/o E6, Lal Kuan, Badarpur,
Delhi.
e) Offence complained of or proved : u/s 279/304A IPC
f) Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
g) Final Order : Convicted
h) Date of such order : 01.09.2014
FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 1 of 10
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
1. Case of the prosecution : An intimation was received at PS Najafgarh vide DD No. 32A on 03.11.2003 at about 10.15 pm regarding accident at Chhawla Bus Stand, Gurgaon Road, Najafgarh. The said DD was marked for inquiry to IO PW 8 SI Chandu Lal who then proceeded to the spot with PW 6 HC Satbir. At the spot, a truck bearing registration no. HR 38A 8574 was found in an accidental condition and one Ashok Kumar met who while producing the accused Deva Singh claimed himself to be an eye witness to the incident. IO recorded his statement, prepared tehrir and got the present case FIR registered. In the meanwhile, an intimation regarding admission of injured/deceased Roshan Lal at DDU Hospital was received at the spot vide DD No. 33A whereupon IO went to the Hospital and found injured Roshan Lal admitted who was opined as unfit for statement. During further investigation, an intimation was received regarding death of injured Roshan Lal at DDU Hospital vide DD No. 20A dated 04.11.2003 whereupon IO got the postmortem conducted. After completing necessary formalities of investigation, chargesheet against the accused for the offence punishable u/s 279/304 A IPC was filed in the Court.
2. Notice of the offence Summons were issued to accused and upon his appearance and after supplying of copies of charge sheet and documents, he was served with the notice u/s 251 Cr.P.C of the offence alleged against him to which he pleaded not guilty and FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 2 of 10 claimed trial.
3. Prosecution Evidence In order to establish its case against the accused, prosecution examined eight witnesses.
PW 1 Dharampal and PW 3 Ramesh Chand are the witnesses to the dead body identification of deceased Roshan Lal.
PW 2 Rakesh is claimed to be an eyewitness to the incident.
PW 4 ASI Roop Chand is the DO who identified and proved the carbon copy of FIR recorded by him as Ex. PW4/A and his endorsement on the rukka as Ex. PW4/B. PW 5 Ashok Kumar is the complainant.
PW 6 HC Satbir participated in the investigation with IO/ASI Chandu Lal. He on the rukka handed over to him by IO, got the present case FIR registered at PS Najafgarh. He is also a witness to the seizure memos of the offending vehicle and DL of the accused which were identified as Ex. PW5/B and Ex. PW5/C respectively. He is also a witness to the formal arrest of accused effected vide arrest memo Ex. PW5/D and personal search memo Ex. PW5/E as well as to the seizure memo of RC & Insurance of the offending vehicle which was identified as Ex. PW6/A. PW 7 Mukesh Kumar on 04.11.2003 while being posted as Home Guard at PS Najafgarh handed over DD No. 33A already Ex. PA4 to IO/ASI Chandu Lal.
PW 8 SI Chandu Lal is the IO of the case.
FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 3 of 10
4. Admission/Denial of Documents In his statement recorded u/s 294 Cr.P.C, accused admitted the genuineness of MLC and PM report of deceased Roshan Lal as Ex. PA1 & Ex. PA2 respectively. Accused also admitted the DD No. 32A, 33A & 20A and Mechanical Inspection Report as Ex. PA3 to Ex. PA6 respectively.
5. Defence of accused Accused did not produce any witness in his defence despite being afforded opportunity, however, in his statement recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C presented his side of story as to the incident in question by stating that he is innocent and had not caused any accident, rather on the given day he was passing from near the spot and all of a sudden, public persons attacked and handed him over to police officials.
6. Contentions of Ld. Counsels for the parties It was argued by Ld. APP for the State that prosecution through the testimony of its witnesses, more specifically of that of PW 2 Rakesh s/o Sh. Umed Singh and of PW 5 Ashok Kumar has succeeded in establishing on record beyond all reasonable doubt that it was the accused who by driving the offending vehicle/truck on a public way in a rash and negligent manner caused the death not amounting to culpable homicide of the pedestrian/deceased Roshan Lal.
Per contra, Ld. Defence Counsel from legal aid argued that the complainant Ashok Kumar who has been examined as PW 5 FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 4 of 10 in the matter turned hostile to the prosecution case in his cross examination conducted on 21.11.2012. While so arguing, Ld. Defence Counsel referred to the crossexamination wherein PW 5 not only admitted as correct that he did not see the accident but also admitted that he is not aware as to who was driving the offending vehicle. It was further argued that even in his crossexamination by Ld. APP, complainant Ashok reiterated that he cannot identify the accused as it was dark at the spot and several persons were present. It was further argued that once the complainant has turned hostile on all material aspects, testimony of the other eyewitness PW 2 Rakesh is rendered inconsequential. It was argued that even otherwise through the testimony of PW 8 SI Chandu Lal, it gets established on record that PW 2 Rakesh was never present at the spot and has been planted as a witness to the incident only for the purposes of claim compensation.
7. Appreciation of Evidence Before taking up the rival contentions, a reference to the testimonies of PW 2 Rakesh, of PW 5 Ashok, of PW 6 HC Satbir and of IO PW 8 SI Chandu Lal becomes essential.
Coming on to the testimony of PW 2 Rakesh who besides the complainant PW 5 Ashok has been cited as an eye witness to the incident, he in his testimony stated that in the year 2003 he used to drive TSR and on 03.11.2003 at about 9.40 pm when he was standing with his TSR and having passengers at Paprawat Mor, Chhawla Stand, he saw a truck having registration no. HR 38A FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 5 of 10 8574 coming at a very high speed and driven in a rash and negligent manner from Chhawla village side, hitting a person aged about 4647 years. He further stated that the said person fell down and public gathered at the spot. He further stated that he had seen the accident with his own eyes and that one Ashok Kumar of his village also reached there and that the name of truck driver who is the accused was revealed as Deva Chand s/o Sh. Hari Singh and that he was apprehended by him with the help of Ashok and other public persons when he was trying to flee away from the spot. He further stated that he left the accused with Ashok and when he was taking the injured to Public Health Centre, Najafgarh, CATS Ambulance reached and took the injured to DDU hospital. He further stated that he identified the accused/truck driver at the spot itself and that later on the name of injured was revealed as Roshan Lal. In his crossexamination, the witness was quite categorical in reiterating that he had seen the accident at a distance of 05 paces while he was standing at T point, NajafgarhPaprawat Mor, Chhawla Stand at about 9.15 pm. He was also categorical in reiterating that the truck/offending vehicle bearing registration no. HR 38A 8574 came from the side of Chhawla village and hit the deceased when after crossing the road, deceased was just on the verge of the road. Witness was again categorical in stating that he removed the injured in his threewheeler to Govt. hospital, Najafgarh and that in the meanwhile ambulance reached and took the deceased to DDU hospital. He also reiterated that truck driver was apprehended at FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 6 of 10 the spot with the help of public and police came to the spot within 1015 minutes when he was just leaving the spot with the injured in his TSR and that Ashok Kumar who was apprehending the accused handed over him to police. He further stated that deceased was not known to him but later on came to know that he belonged to village Sikarpur and that he helped him as a human being.
As can be seen, testimony of PW 2 Rakesh is quite convincing not only with respect to his having been present at the spot at the relevant time and having witnessed the incident but also with respect to his giving an unimpeachable account of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by the accused as a cause of death not amounting to culpable homicide of deceased Roshan Lal. Merely because complainant Ashok Kumar who has been examined as PW 5 had turned hostile to the prosecution case in his crossexamination cannot in itself be a ground to doubt the otherwise coherent and reliable testimony of independent public witness PW 2 Rakesh. Thus, the contention of Ld. Defence Counsel that testimony of PW 2 Rakesh cannot be believed is having no force and is accordingly rejected.
Even otherwise, perusal of testimony of complainant PW 5 Ashok Kumar who was examined on 04.10.2012 goes on to show that in his examinationinchief, he was equally categorical in giving an almost exact account of the incident. He stated that on 03.11.2003 at about 9.40 pm when he was standing at Chhawla stand and started going towards his home, he saw one truck bearing FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 7 of 10 registration no. HR 38A 8574 coming from the side of Chhawla village at a high speed and while being driven in a rash and negligent manner, it hit a pedestrian who fell on the ground. He further stated that public persons caught hold of the driver whose name was disclosed as Deva Singh and who is present in the Court and the injured was taken to hospital. He further stated that police reached the spot and recorded his statement Ex. PW5/A and besides seizing the offending vehicle and the DL of the accused, arrested him vide arrest memo Ex. PW5/D and PS Memo Ex. PW5/E, both bearing his signatures at points A. On the said day when the witness was examinedinchief, his crossexamination was deferred and it was on 21.11.2012 that he was called for his crossexamination. In his crossexamination, witness took a complete U Turn of what he had stated in his examinationinchief, however, there was no plausible explanation to be found of his turning hostile. The law stands well settled that merely because a witness has turned hostile, his entire testimony cannot be thrown out of the window. If some part of his testimony can be of corroborative help, it can be taken note of and relied upon. As has been seen above, PW 2 Rakesh also stated about the presence of complainant Ashok at the spot and catching hold of the accused. Further, PW 6 HC Satbir who participated in the investigation with IO PW 8 SI Chandu Lal also deposed about the presence of PW 5 Ashok Kumar at the spot and his handing over of the accused to the IO as the driver of the offending truck. Nothing came in the crossexamination of PW 5 FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 8 of 10 Ashok Kumar that the arrest of accused was not effected at the spot in his presence or that the arrest memo and personal search memo does not bear his signatures. Testimony of PW 8 SI Chandu Lal also offers necessary corroboration regarding the presence of PW 5 Ashok at the spot at the relevant time and recording of his statement Ex. PW5/A. Moreover, IO also explained in his cross examination about his finding 810 public persons and out of these, recording statement of PW 5 Ashok and PW 2 Rakesh. Thus, in view of the testimony of these witnesses it gets established on record beyond all reasonable doubt that on 03.11.2003 it was the accused who was driving the truck bearing registration no. HR 38 A 8574 on a public way/road in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any other person and that by such driving of the offending vehicle by him that he hit a pedestrian/deceased Roshan Lal resulting in his death not amounting to culpable homicide. The MLC and the PM Report which have since been admitted by the accused u/s 294 Cr.P.C are also consistent with the testimony of public witnesses so far as the cause of death of the deceased is concerned. Also, accused in his statement recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C admitted about his passing through the spot on the given day and time but gave a vague reply of his having been caught by the public without any involvement of his in the accident. There is nothing in the crossexamination of any of the prosecution witnesses especially of PW 2 Rakesh, of PW 5 Ashok and of IO PW 8 SI Chandu Lal that the accused while passing FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 9 of 10 through the spot was all of a sudden either attacked by the public or for no reason handed over to the police. Thus, prosecution succeeds in establishing the commission of offence punishable u/s 279/304 A IPC by the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
8. Conclusion In view of the forgoing, accused is held guilty of the offence punishable u/s 279/304A IPC. He stands convicted accordingly. Be put up for hearing the convict on the quantum of sentence on 15.09.2014 at 2.00 pm. ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT DATED : 01.09.2014 (SATISH KUMAR ARORA) CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE DWARKA COURTS : DELHI FIR No: 623/03 PS : Najafgarh State Vs. Deva Singh Page 10 of 10