Full Judgment Text
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
RESERVED ON : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2015
th
DECIDED ON : 9 OCTOBER, 2015
+ CRL.REV.P.733/2014
ANOOP SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through : Dr.Vijendra Mahndiyan, Advocate
with Ms.Pallavi Awasthi,
Advocate.
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through : Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.GARG, J.
1. The instant revision petition has been preferred by the
petitioner – Anoop Singh to challenge the legality and propriety of a
judgment dated 30.10.2014 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in
Crl.A.37/14 by which order of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
dated 03.09.2014 convicting him under Sections 279/337/304-A IPC was
upheld. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo RI for three months with
fine ` 500/- each under Sections 279/337 IPC and SI for nine months with
fine 9,000/- under Section 304-A IPC. The substantive sentences were to
`
operate concurrently.
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 1 of 7
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge-
sheet was that on 16.09.1997 at about 01.15 p.m. near Jeewan Hospital,
New Rohtak Road, Delhi, while driving bus No.DL-1PA-0014 on route
No.805 in a rash and negligent manner the petitioner hit it against a cycle-
rickshaw from behind and caused injuries to Kiran Anand and Sushma
Duggal. Sushma Duggal subsequently succumbed to the injuries and
expired. Daily Diary (DD) No.14, Police Post Siddhipura, Mark ‘B’ came
into existence at 01.20 pm on getting information about the accident. DD
No.17 Mark ‘A’ was recorded at 02.35 p.m. intimating that two women
were admitted at Jeewan Hospital in injured condition. PW-9 (SI Jai Pal
Singh) along with Const.Ram Avtar went to the spot. After recording
statement (Ex.PW-1/A) of the victim - Kiran Anand; he lodged First
Information Report. The accused was arrested. Post-mortem examination
on Sushma’s body was conducted. Statements of the witnesses conversant
with the facts were recorded. On completion of investigation, a charge-
sheet was filed in the Court. The prosecution examined thirteen witnesses
to establish its case. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the petitioner pleaded false
implication. After considering the rival contentions of the parties and on
appreciation of the evidence, by the judgment dated 03.09.2014, the
petitioner was found guilty of the aforesaid offences. Crl.A.37/14 to
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 2 of 7
challenge the conviction and sentence resulted in its dismissal vide order
dated 30.10.2014. Aggrieved by the said verdicts, the instant revision
petition has been filed.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have
examined the file. The judgments of the Courts below are based upon fair
appraisal of the evidence and all the relevant contentions raised by the
petitioner have been duly considered. Petitioner’s counsel has failed to
point out any material irregularity or illegality in the impugned judgments
to intervene.
4. Material testimony is that of PW-1 (Kiran Anand), who was
one of the victims. On her statement (Ex.PW-1/A), the FIR was lodged on
the same day without any delay. In her statement (Ex.PW-1/A), Kiran
Anand disclosed that when she and her friend Sushma Duggal were
coming to their home on a cycle-rickshaw and reached near Jeewan
Hospital at around 01.15 p.m., a blue line bus No.DL-1PA-0014 driven by
Anoop Singh in a rash and negligent manner came from behind and struck
against the cycle-rickshaw as a result of which they both fell down and
sustained injuries. In her Court statement also, proved the version given to
the police at the very first instance without any variation. She elaborated
that the bus driver was in a hurry to reach the bus stop to prevent another
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 3 of 7
bus to reach there before him. She reiterated that the bus was at a very fast
speed and it hit the cycle-rickshaw suddenly from behind as a result of
which it turned turtle. She revealed that number of the offending vehicle
was A-0014. In the cross-examination initially she informed that the
driver of the offending vehicle was not seen by her at the time of accident.
However, when cross-examined by learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, she
clarified that the accused was seated on the driver-seat of Bus No.A-0014
and she had seen him through the window screen. She categorically
denied that the accident was due to negligence of the rickshaw-puller or
that the bus was not being driven by the accused. It is pertinent to mention
that bus No. DL-1PA-0014 was seized at the spot vide seizure memo
Ex.PW-4/B. The relevant documents pertaining to the said bus were
seized from the petitioner vide seizure memo Ex.PW-4/A. Petitioner’s
driving licence was also seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-9/C. The
offending vehicle was got mechanically inspected vide report Ex.PW-6/A.
The accused did not furnish any explanation about his presence at the
place of occurrence when he was not driving the vehicle. He did not
inform if he had no concern with the offending vehicle and it was never
driven by him. In his 313 Cr.P.C. statement, he wished to examine
Pardeep, its conductor which he subsequently failed to do so. It falsifies
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 4 of 7
his plea that the bus was not being driven by him. He did not summon the
registered owner of the vehicle in defence to establish that he was not
employed as a driver on the said bus. Conflicting and inconsistent defence
has been taken by the accused to buttress his plea. He even denied his
presence at the spot and claimed that he was arrested from his house. In
313 Cr.P.C. statement, he did not claim his arrest from his house. Rather
in response to Question No.2, he stated that he was stopped by the police
officials at the spot and was falsely implicated in this case. The
prosecution examined PW-13 (Anil Kumar), who had taken the vehicle on
superdari. Nothing was suggested to him in the cross-examination that the
bus was not being driven by him at the relevant time.
5. Non-examination of rickshaw-puller is inconsequential as
process issued to secure his presence repeatedly remained unexecuted and
could not be traced. Under these circumstances, no adverse inference can
be drawn against the prosecution for his non-examination. Failure to
conduct Test Identification Parade (TIP) is not fatal as the accused was
arrested at the spot and was identified by one of the victims. He was
named in the FIR. Similarly failure of the Investigating Officer to serve
notice under Section 133 Motor Vehicle Act to the registered owner of the
vehicle is of no relevance due to apprehension of the accused at the spot.
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 5 of 7
6. Minor discrepancies and improvements highlighted by the
petitioner’s counsel do not affect the core of the prosecution case. The
victims were returning to their homes at about 1.15 p.m. when there was
no possibility of heavy traffic at the spot. The accused hit the cycle-
rickshaw from behind as a result of which it turned turtle and the
passengers sitting on it sustained injuries due to fall. It appears that due to
his anxiety to reach the bus stop to pick up passengers before the rival bus
could reach there, the vehicle was being driven at a high speed by the
accused. No contributory negligence was attributed to the rickshaw-puller.
Petitioner’s conduct is unnatural and unreasonable. He did not take the
victims to the hospital and even denied to have driven the offending
vehicle.
7. Petitioner’s conviction is based upon acceptable legal
evidence and needs no intervention. No sound reasons exist to differ from
the concurrent findings of the Courts below. Since the Trial Court has
already taken lenient view, sentence awarded to the petitioner requires no
modification. The petition lack merits and is dismissed.
th
8. The petitioner shall surrender before the Trial Court on 16
November 2015 to serve out the remaining period of substantive sentence.
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 6 of 7
9. Trial Court record be sent back forthwith with the copy of the
order. A copy of the order be sent to the Superintendent Jail for
information.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
OCTOBER 09, 2015 /
tr
Crl.Rev.P.733/2014 Page 7 of 7