TATA Ace driver died and PW-2 sustained injuries. PW-2 deposed before the Court in cogent manner and without infirmities. The law enforcing authority also registered a case against the RW-1. The RW-1 deposed before the Court that the deceased drove his vehicle in rash and negligent manner in zigzag way and he hit the bus. Curiously, in the cross examination of PW-2, they put a suggestion that the TATA Ace vehicle was driven by the deceased with only one headlight on and therefore he without sufficient light, dashed against the bus. The suggestion is diametrically opposite to the evidence of the RW-1. Further, RW-1, to prove his case, has not produced any documents. Rough sketch also was not marked. He also admitted that criminal case is pending against him. Therefore, on principle that evidence of injured witness shall be placed on high pedestal than the other witness. The learned trial judge believed the testimony of injured witness and has held that the RW-1 drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner overtaking ongoing vehicle without following any traffic rules and dashed against the deceased's vehicle and caused accident. This Court, in view of the above discussion finds no error or perversity in the finding of the learned trial judge in fixing the negligence on RW-1. Hence, this Court affirms the finding of the learned 7/14
