Fir No. 157/10 State vs . Ram Dev & Ors Ps Jahangir Puri Page No. 1 ... on 10 February, 2020
29. Another crucial witness whose testimony needs to be examined is PW4
i.e. Mohd. Babu Khan. Perusal of the record shows that Babu Khan averred in
his examination in chief that the accused was driving the offending vehicle on
the fateful day and he had taken the said vehicle on contract for 11 months from
accused Wahida but it is matter of record that the said relevant document by
virtue of which accused Wahida had given the offending vehicle in question to
PW Mohd.Babu Khan had never been brought on record. Perusal of the record
furthers shows that the examination in chief of PW4 was deferred merely on
this point that the witness PW4 Babu Khan sought some time to produce the
original agreement that had beemn executed between him and accused Wahida
for a period of 11 months for plying of the offending vehicle on contractual
basis by Babu Khan but this witness never turned up again for his deposition.
Further, it was for the prosecution to explain as to why the said witness i.e.
Babu Khan was not further summoned or examined in chief or cross examined
to throw light on the aspects of as to who was the person within whose
supervision and superdari the said vehicle was on the fateful day of the
accident? This aspect further become vital as vide statement dated 18.01.2014
accused Wahida had claimed herself to be the registered owner of the offending
FIR No. 157/10 State Vs. Ram Dev & Ors PS Jahangir Puri Page NO. 16 of 19
vehicle and the said vehicle was got released by her on superdari vide Ex.P3,
bearing her signature at point A on the said document and accused Wahida had
nowhere stated or acceded to the fact that PW Babu Khan was the person with
whom she had entered into any kind of contract, permitting him to ply the
offending vehicle on contractual basis for a period of 11 months. Thus, the
examination of PW4 i.e. Babu Khan and his cross examination was extremely
crucial and vital to clear the clouds raised upon the case of the prosecution and
nonexamination of PW4 by the prosecution has not only punctured the case of
the prosecution but has also proved fatal to the prosecution. The examination of
PW4 was also incumbent and necessary as the accused Ram Dev has taken a
defence that on 07.12.2010 he was present at his house, when Babu Khan being
his neighbour came to him and asked him to accompany him to the police
station as the vehicle of accused Wahida which had been seized by the police
was to be released. Accused Ram Dev further stated in his defence evidence
that babu Khan took him to the police station on the pretext of getting the
vehicle released on superdari but on reaching the police station, the police
officials took the copy of his licence and Aadhar Card and asked him to append
his signature and it was only later on, when it came to his knowledge that the
said vehicle was involved in the accident and that he has been falsely
implicated in the present case.