State vs Kishun Dev Mehto on 14 March, 2011
Having heard the respective submissions and having gone
through the record, I find force in the submissions of ld. defence counsel
as the witness cannot escape the crossÂexamination by simply stating
that whatever he / she wanted to depose has already been deposed by
him / her in her earlier examination / crossÂexamination. The defence
cannot be denied the opportunity to establish its defence. Even
otherwise, merely because complainant / PW1 Shipra Mitra testified that
the TSR was driven at a high speed, it cannot in itself be a conclusive
proof of rash and negligent driving. Prosecution through the aid of other
facts and circumstances of the case has to clearly bring on record that in
the given set of facts and circumstances, the high speed of the vehicle
driven by accused was sufficient to arrive at the only conclusion of rash
and negligent driving by the accused. It came on record through the
testimony of IO PW3 Abhishek Singh that three vehicles were involved
in the accident and one of the drivers namely Shiv Kumar of Tata Indica
Car informed that the driver of Honda City Car applied sudden breaks
in order to save a cow which has come on the road. How the vehicles
were positioned on the road, what was the distance between them and
what was the traffic flow at the given point of time, no clue / help is
offered by any of the prosecution witnesses including the complainant.
Further, it also came on record through the testimony of complainant
State vs. Kishun Dev Mehto. FIR No. 448/06, PS Pandav Nagar Page No. 10 of 11
herself that the Tata Indica Car also hit the Honda City Car from behind.
If that was the case, then why the role of the other two drivers of the
other two vehicles was not looked into, testimony of none of the
prosecution witnesses including the IO is offering any help. Thus, I am
of the considered opinion that prosecution has failed to bring home its
case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused that on 22.09.06 it
was the accused who by driving his TSR in a rash and negligent manner
caused injury on the person of complainant / PW1 Shipra Mitra. Thus,
the prosecution case against the accused fails.