Raj Kumar Gupta vs State of Haryana

S.S. Dewan, J.

This is a petition u/s 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Code) for quashing the proceedings initiated on the basis of F.I.R. No. 627, dated October 19, 1984, U/ss. 304A/337/279, Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of SubDivisional Magistrate, Jagadhri.

The facts leading to this petition are in a very narrow compass. The F.I.R. No. 627 was lodged against the petitioner on October 19, 1984, at Police Station City Yamunanagar, alleging therein that the petitioner was driving a Car No. HYX808 on 15.10.1984 when he met with an accident with a bullock cart and one Barjinder Singh and his wife Smt. Krishana Devi suffered injuries in the accident and that Barjinder Singh died on 16.10.1984 in the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research at Chandigarh because of the injuries suffered by him. After necessary investigation, the petitioner was challaned and sent up for trial under the said offences. The trial Magistrate examind Krishana Devi, injured and the other two witnesses, namely Phul Singh and Zahid Khan. All these witnesses were declared hostile as they did not support the prosecution version. The Assistant Public Prosecutor made a statement in the Court which is in the following terms :

"In view of the statements of the only witness of occurrence, Smt, Krishana Devi who has resiled and the other two witnesses phul Singh and Zahid Khan, who have also resiled, I do not want to examine any other witness as it will not improve the case of the prosecution and it will only be a burden on the State exchequer and close the case."

The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred me to the statements of the injured witness and the other two eyewitnesses wherein they have categorically stated that they could not say who was driving the car at the alleged time of the accident. The well established principle of law is not disputed by the learned counsel for both the parties that if no offence is disclosed or made out from the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the proceedings can be quashed u/s 482 of the Code. In the instant case, the very basis of the prosecution case has no legs to stand. In this view of the matter, the proceedings against the petitioner cannot survive under the said offences. Therefore, in the interest of justice and to prevent the abuse of the process of the court and also to prevent the petitioner from being unnecessarily harassed by an illegal prosecution, it is just and proper that the proceedings against him should be quashed.

As a result of the above discussion, the present petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner arising out of F.I.R. No. 627 dated 19.10.1984 pending in the Court of SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Jagadhri are hereby quashed.