Excelsior Correspondent
Jammu, July 28: Almost a decade after, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu Amarjeet Singh Langeh today acquitted an accused facing trial in a 2011 accident case as the prosecution failed to bring home charges against accused for offences under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of RPC.
The judgment was announced by the CJM Jammu, in a case, State through Police Station Bus Stand, Jammu V/s Ram Krishan, son of Baldev Ram, resident of village Gattila Gajansoo, Tehsil and District Jammu.
The Court observed that the prosecution has failed to bring home charges against accused for offences under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of RPC by leading cogent and trustworthy evidence.
Suspicion, ever strong and grave, cannot take the place of proof and challan hence, is therefore dismissed.
The court, however, acquitted the accused from offences under Sections: 279, 337 and 304-A of RPC. In case FIR No.: 54/2011 registered at Police Station Bus Stand and also discharged from his bail and surety bonds.
Kuldeep Kumar was APP for State (Accused in person) and Ashok Beotra was Advocate for accused.
The Court also directed that seized property if any be released absolutely in favour of real owner/owners thereof after appeal time is over and be consigned to records after due compilation.
As per the brief history of the case as un-folded in the chargesheet are that an information from reliable sources was received by Police Station Bus Stand, Jammu on 07.09.2011 to the effect that while a Motorcycle without registration number was being driven by Ravinder Jeet Singh, on a normal speed from Rotary Chowk towards Bikram Chowk with his wife as pillion rider along with their child and when the Motorcycle was passing through the fly-over, a Bus bearing registration number JK02P-0383 which was allegedly being driven in a rash and negligent manner by accused Ram Krishan, son of Baldev Ram of village Gattila Gajansoo, Tehsil and District Jammu, was also coming from the same side and reached near Resham Ghar stairs, driver at about 2:30 p.m – lost control as a consequence of which Motorcycle was hit which resulted in an accident in which Gurpreet Kour, wife of Ravinderjeet Singh, was not only seriously injured but also succumbed to injuries on spot. The child was also injured.
Based on aforesaid set of facts, an FIR No. 54/2011 for offences under sections 279/337 and 304-A of RPC was registered with Police Station Bus Stand, Jammu and investigation started.
During investigation, it was found that accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of Bus by accused on 07.09.2011 from Rotary Chowk towards Bikram Chowk and investigation also unveiled that Bus belonged to K.C Public School, Jammu.
On the conclusion of investigation, the accused was found involved in the commission of offences under sections 279/337 and 304-A of RPC and an instant charge sheet was accordingly presented against him on 14.10.2011 in the Court of CJM Jammu.
Charges against accused for aforesaid offences were framed on 06.06.2012. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried following which the Prosecution was directed to lead evidence.
In order to bring home charges against the accused, prosecution cited 16 witnesses in the case. It however succeeded in examination of only 4 of them. Witnesses examined by prosecution were two policemen, one supardar who executed supurdnama with respect to Bus in question and witness to supurdnama.
Even the husband of deceased who was allegedly driving the Motorcycle in question with deceased along with child being the pillion rider, did not come forth to get himself examined and put on record his version, certainly is deeply embarrassing for prosecution.
Non-responsiveness on the part of Ravinder Jeet Singh, is highly in-excusable to say the least.
The Court further observed that there is nothing in the testimony of these witnesses that the occurrence in question took place due to rash and negligent driving of the accused.
As a matter of record, one of the witnesses namely Constable Pyare Lal testified in his cross-examination that the offending vehicle was coming from Amphalla towards Bikram Chowk, a deposition that runs wholly counter to the core of the prosecution case.
Investigating Officer in the case could not be examined by prosecution and because of non-examination, the site plan remains un-proved.
Follow our WhatsApp channel