Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. In brief, the accused has been sent to face trial upon State Vs. Piyush Kumar PS Kotwali the allegations that on 16.10.2011 at about 11.15 pm, at Town Hall, Nai Sarak, opposite shop no. 765, Chandni Chowk, Delhi, accused was found driving a car bearing no. DL-2CW-4989 without a valid driving license in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and personal safety of others and hit against the complainant Sh. Naresh Tyagi who sustained injuries grievous in nature and on 17.11.2011 and the accused handed over a driving license to the IO which was found to be forged document which he dishonestly used as genuine which he knew or had a reason to believe it as a forged documents during investigation for the purpose of cheating. The said allegations against the accused led to the registration of a present FIR against the accused under section 279/338/420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter called as IPC) and 3/181 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as MV Act).

20. Let us peruse the provision of Section 338 IPC, which is as under :-

Section 338. Causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others.-Whoever causes grievous hurt to any person by doing any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life, or the personal safety of others, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

21. Essentials Ingredients of Section 338 IPC are:

(1). Accused did an act rashly or negligently.
(2). Act endangered human life or the personal safety of others.
(3). Such acts cause grievous hurt.

22. 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:-

53. On careful perusal and analysis of the entire evidence, I find that there is no corroborative, consistent and sufficient evidence to make up the edifice of the prosecution case which has been produced by the prosecution for offence u/s 279/338/468/471 IPC and u/s 3/181 MV Act. Given the aforementioned facts and circumstances, it has to be concluded that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the accused Piyush Kumar Khanna is hereby acquitted for an offence punishable under Section 279/338/468/471 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/181 of Motors Vehicles Act.