car, as per P.w. 8/Jeniska, the accused overtook another bus and it is therefore obvious that, they had not seen the accused actually overtaking another vehicle. P.w.9/Autora did not state anything about the accused overtaking any other vehicle. P.w.10/Allan, also did not state about the accused overtaking any other vehicle and so also P.w.11/Estan. The prosecution did not even care to find out, considering that the witnesses examined by them were child witnesses, as to which places they were sitting in the said Trax jeep with a view to find out whether they were in a position to see the oncoming KTC bus. In the absence of the description of the vehicle by P.w.4/Jeeth, P.w.4/Delito and P.w.6/Aralda and the contradiction in the nature of the vehicle seen by them i.e. P.w.7/Sunil Chopdekar and P.w.8/Jeniska and any reference being another vehicle overtaken, by P.w.9/Aurora, P.w.10/Allan and P.w.11/Estan, it is difficult to believe their versions that the accident took place at a time when the accused was overtaking another vehicle at all. Their versions also appear to be improbable in the light of the panchanama/sketch produced by the prosecution. It is quite improbable that in case the accused had overtaken another vehicle, he would have been found almost parallel to the road and on its extreme left. Therefore the versions given by the said childwitnesses appear to be improbable.
