AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Though none appears for the petitioner, with help of
learned Public Prosecutor I have perused the record.
The petitioner was the driver of a jeep bearing
Registration No.RJN. 445. The jeep collided with a bus bearing
Registration No.RJ-28P-0142. The bus was stationery. The
passengers were deboarding. One passenger who was removing
luggage from the roof fell as a result of the impact and died.
Charged for having committed an offence punishable under
Section 279 / 304A IPC, the learned trial Judge convicted the
petitioner for both the offences vide judgment dated November
22, 2001 and vide sentence of even date directed the petitioner to
suffer S.I. for one year for the offence punishable under Section
304A IPC and pay fine in sum of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo
S.I. for 10 days. For the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC
the petitioner was sentenced to undergo S.I. for a period of three
months and pay fine in sum of Rs. 100/-. Appeal filed by the
petitioner has been rejected by the learned Court of Sessions vide
impugned order dated January 23, 2002.
Though both the Courts have noted the testimony of
PW8, Mahendra Singh, M.T.O. who had inspected the jeep after
the accident and his report is Exhibited P7 but I find the
appreciation thereof to be not applying recognised principles of
law . The report would show that the brake oil of the main cylinder
had leaked. During cross examination the witness had admitted
that on account of the brake oil having leaked the brake could
have failed. He also admitted that the brake oil could leak when
the jeep was in motion. The learned Court of Sessions has simply
noted the said testimony but on personal knowledge has held that
the petitioner would be presumed to be driving negligently. The
learned Judge has recorded that he has often seen the jeeps being
driven fast to reach a bus wherefrom passengers are deboarding.
The intention is to pick up as many passengers who deboard.
In my opinion, no presumption could be drawn against
the petitioner that he drove the jeep fast when he saw passengers
deboarding from the bus.
In view of the testimony of PW8 and the report Exhibit
P7, brake failure cannot be ruled out.
The petition is disposed of acquitting the petitioner of
the charges framed against for having committed an offence
punishable under Section 279 IPC and Section 304A IPC. The
sentences imposed are set aside. The bail bonds and surety bonds
furnished by the petitioner are discharged.