The High Court allowed this revision petition challenging a conviction under Section 304-A IPC. The court accepted the prosecution's failure to disprove the defense that the bus was stationary when the deceased fell out, resulting in the conviction being set aside. The judgment did not cite any precedent.
The conviction of the petitioner was set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRR No.1909 of 2002 Date of decision: 26.04.2013
Om Parkash
.... Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
Present : Mr. A.S.Virk, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.
AJAY TEWARI, J.(ORAL)
The present revision has been filed against the concurrent orders sentencing the petitioner under Section 304-A IPC (where however the Appellate Court has reduced the sentence under Section 304-A from 1½ years to 1 year).
The allegations are that the complainant accompanied by his mother-in-law and father-in-law had reached at Indri Chowk, Ladwa by bus and when he and his father-in-law alighted and his mother-in-law was in the process of alighting the petitioner blew whistle. On the said whistle, the co-accused (driver of the bus) started the bus as a result of which the complainant's mother-in-law fell down and the rear wheel of the bus passed over her body resulting in her death.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that PW-10 – Nand Lal, who is husband of the deceased and father-in-law of the complainant and is eye-witness has categorically stated that when his wife was disembarking from the bus, the bus was standing still. As per him, in the face of this unequivocal admission, the petitioner could not be convicted under Section 304-A.
CRR No.1909 of 2002
-2-
Learned State counsel has not been able to point out any
flaw in this argument.
Resultantly, this petition is allowed. The conviction of the
petitioner is set aside.
26.04.2013 sonia
[ AJAY TEWARI ] JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner could be convicted under Section 304-A IPC given the evidence of a co-accused that the bus was standing still when the incident occurred.
Whether the established fact that the bus was stationary invalidates the conviction for causing death by negligence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Om Parkash
State of Haryana
Ajay Tewari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
