CC 72/2019 1 JMFC, Pakala

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

OF I CLASS, PAKALA.

Present: B.Devendra Reddy

Judicial Magistrate of I Class,
Pakala.

Wednesday, this the 18th (Eighteenth) day of March, 2020

(18-03-2020)

C.C.No.72 of 2019
Cr.No.60 of 2019 of Pakala Police Station

State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police,

Pakala. …Complainant

- Versus –

Jakir khan, aged 42 years, S/o Chhote Pathan,

Hathvan village, Hivara Roshanagav Post, Jalna
District, Maharastra. …Accused

This case is coming before me for hearing on today i.e.

18-03-2020 in the presence of Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State,
and of Sri J.M.Gowri Sankara Raju, Advocate for Accused, upon hearing
the arguments on both sides, having perused the material on record
and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court
delivered the following:-
J U D G M E N T:

The sub-Inspector of Police, Pakala filed charge sheet

against accused in Cr.No.60 of 2019 for the offences punishable under

Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code.

2. The brief averments of the charge sheet are that:

On 06-05-2019 at about 6:30 AM, the deceased Narayana

purchased water bottle at Raziya Hotel, Mango Nagar, Damalacheruvu

situated by the side of Pakala-Damalacheruvu road, when he turn

towards to the road suddenly, one driver of lorry bearing No.MH 12 AR

CC 72/2019 2 JMFC, Pakala

7105 came from inside of Mango Nagar with high speed and negligent

manner and dashed to him and ran over on him, as a result of which

said Narayana sustained severe crush injury on his left foot, bleeding

injury on left side hip and died on the spot. Later PW1 came to know

that the name of driver who is responsible for the accident is one

Jakirkhan.

2(a) Basing of report of PW1, PW8 the then Sub-Inspector of

Police, Pakala, registered this case, issued First Information Report,

conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased Narayana at

Primary Health Centre, Damalacheruvu in the presence of PW4, LW7/

Sathrla Sudharshan and LW8/J.Gangadharam, examined the witnesses

and recorded their statements, visited the scene of offence and

prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence. On 8-5-2019 arrested

the accused and released him on bail after obtaining sufficient sureties

and served Section 41-A of Criminal Procedure Code notice. PW6/

Dr.P.Chandraskehar, Medical Officer, conducted postmortem

examination over the dead body of deceased and opined that died due

to shock to injury to vital internal organ spinal card due to road traffic

accident. PW7 G.Venkateswara Prasad, Motor Vehicle Inspector who

inspected the crime vehicle opined that the accident was not happened

due to any prior mechanical defects of crime vehicle. After completion

of investigation, charge sheet is filed against accused for the offence

punishable under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code.

3. On appearance of accused, copies of documents are

furnished to him and he is examined under Sec.251 of Criminal

CC 72/2019 3 JMFC, Pakala

Procedure Code, 1973 for the accusation levelled against him under

Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code, read over and explained to him in

Telugu for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. On behalf of prosecution, PWs. 1 to 8 are examined and

Exs. P1 to P8 are marked.

5. After closure of prosecution evidence, accused is

examined under Sec.313 Criminal Procedure Code for the incriminating

evidence deposed against him by prosecution witnesses, read over and

explained the same to him in Telugu for which he denied the same and

reported no defence evidence.

6. Heard the arguments on both sides and perused the

record.

7. Now the points for determination is

Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all the

reasonable doubt that the accused was the driver of
crime vehicle at the time of accident and he drove
the vehicle in a rash or negligent manner and he is
responsible for the death of deceased D.Narayana
and that he is liable for punishment under Section
304-A of Indian Penal Code?

In order to prove the case of prosecution, the prosecution

has examined PWs 1 to 8 and exhibits P1 to P8 are marked.

PW1 who is elder brother of deceased Narayana deposed

that on 5-5-2019 around 6 or 7 AM, he received a phone call from

unknown person and he informed him that near the Mango Nagar,

Pakala-Damalacheruvu road, a lorry came with speed and hit to his

brother while he was crossing the road and died on the spot, then he
CC 72/2019 4 JMFC, Pakala

went to the scene of offence, there on knowing that the dead body of

his brother was shifted to the government hospital, Piler and that he

went to the Police Station and lodged Ex.P1 report and went to the said

Hospital, there he found the dead body of his brother.

8. From the above evidence of PW1, it can be said that he is

not eye witness to the incident. He did not depose any incriminating

evidence against the accused.

9. PW2 who is cousin of deceased Narayana deposed that

on 5-5-2019 around 6 to 7 AM, he received a phone call from police,

Pakala and informed that in the morning hours near Mango Nagar,

Pakala-Damalacheruvu road, while his cousin was crossing the road for

purchasing water bottle, a lorry bearing No.MH 12 AR 7105 came with

speed and hit to his cousin and that he was died on the spot, then he

went to the scene of offence, there he came to know that the dead

body of his cousin was shifted to the Government Hospital, Piler and

that he went to the Police Station, Pakala, PW1 lodged Ex.P1 report,

from there he went to the Government Hospital, Piler, there he found

the dead body of his cousin. He further deposed that later he came to

know that due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of lorry,

the accident was occurred to his cousin and also he came to know the

name of driver of crime vehicle as Jakir Khan.

10. When analyzed the above evidence of PW2, it is clear

that he was not an eye witness to the occurrence and he is only hear

say witness. PW2 did not depose any incriminating evidence against

the accused. Only PW2 stated the name of driver of crime vehicle as
CC 72/2019 5 JMFC, Pakala

Jakir Khan, the said name was stated by PW2 as some body informed

the said name to him. So, except stating the name of the accused as

Jakir Khan, he did not state that he was present at the time of accident

and he saw the accused at time of accident at the scene of offence. So,

basing on the hearsay evidence of PW2, it cannot be said that the

accused was driver of crime vehicle at the time of accident.

11. PW3 deposed that on 6-5-2019 on knowing that the dead

body of deceased Narayana was shifted to the Government Hospital,

Piler, he along LW7/Sudharsan and LW8/Gangadharam went to the said

Hospital, there in their presence police conducted inquest over the dead

body of deceased Narayana under cover of Ex.P2 inquest report. He

further deposed that he noticed injuries on the body of deceased

Narayana. PW8/ investigation officer deposed that he conducted

inquest over the dead body of Narayana in the presence of PW3,

LW7/Sudharsan and LW8/Gangadharam. As per evidence of PW3 also

police conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased Narayana

under Ex.P2 inquest report. As per Ex.P2 inquest report and as per the

evidence of PW3, the deceased Narayana was died in the road traffic

accident.

12. As per the case of prosecution, PWs 4 and 5 are said to

be eye witnesses to the accident to D.Narayana. They deposed that

they did not know anything about the facts of this case and police did

not examine them and not recorded their statements. Since PWs 4 and

5 did not support the case of prosecution, their Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C.

Statements are marked as Exs.P3 and P4. If, really the accused drove
CC 72/2019 6 JMFC, Pakala

the lorry in a rash or negligent manner, PWs 4 and 5 who are said to be

eye witnesses to the accident would have stated the same before the

Court. Since PWs 4 and 5 did not state any incriminating evidence

against the accused, it can be said that accused was not the driver of

crime vehicle at the time of accident and he is not responsible for the

death of D.Narayana in a road traffic accident.

13. PW6/Doctor deposed that he conducted postmortem

examination on 6-5-2019 at about 4:50 PM over the dead body of

deceased Narayana and found internal and external injuries and also

fracture of lumbar vertebra and hip bone. He issue Ex.P5/ post mortem

certificate opining that the deceased would appear to have died of

shock due to injury to vital internal organ, spinal card due to road traffic

accident.

14. There is no disputes with regard to the death of Narayana

in a road traffic accident. From the evidence of PW6/Doctor, it is clear

that the deceased D.Narayana was died in a road traffic accident.

15. PW7/ Motor Vehicle Inspector deposed that he inspected

the crime vehicle bearing No.MH 12 AR 7105 HGV lorry on 8-5-2019 at

the Police Station, Pakala and found the condition of the break system is

satisfactory and issued Ex.P6/Motor Vehicle Inspector Report, opining

that the accident was not due to any mechanical defect of the vehicle.

16. It is not the defence of the accused that due to

mechanical defects in his vehicle he did accident. Even though there is

no mechanical defect in the crime vehicle, as the prosecution failed to

prove that the accused was the driver of crime vehicle at the time of
CC 72/2019 7 JMFC, Pakala

accident, hence, it can be said that accused was not the driver of crime

vehicle, which vehicle was inspected by PW7.

17. PW8 investigation officer testified that on 6-5-2019, he

registered this case basing on Ex.P1 report submitted by PW1 in

Cr.No.60/2019 under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code, issued Ex.P7

First Information Report, visited the Government Hospital, Piler,

conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased Narayana, send the

dead body for postmortem examination, examined the witnesses,

recorded their Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C. Statements and prepared Ex.P8/

rough sketch of scene of offence and sent a requisition to the Motor

Vehicle Inspector to inspect the crime vehicle, on surrender he arrested

the accused and released him on bail, after completion of investigation,

he laid charge sheet against the accused.

18. In the cross examination, PW8 stated that he did not

examine the owner of crime vehicle. If, PW8 investigation officer

examined the owner of crime vehicle, the real truth will come out

whether he handed over the crime vehicle to the accused or not. Non-

examination of the owner of crime vehicle is fatal to the case of

prosecution. Except non-examination of the owner of crime vehicle, the

investigation officer, PW8 conducted investigation on proper lines. Mere

conducting the investigation on proper lines by Pw8/ Sub-Inspector of

Police, Pakala is not sufficient to convict the accused. To convict the

accused, the eye witnesses and circumstantial witnesses should depose

incriminating evidence against the accused before the court. In this

CC 72/2019 8 JMFC, Pakala

case as discussed supra, the prosecution witnesses did not depose any

incriminating evidence against the accused.

19. In view of the above discussion, this court holds that the

prosecution failed to prove that the accused was the driver of crime

vehicle at the time of accident and he was responsible for the death of

Narayana in road traffic accident. Hence, accused is entitled for

acquittal. The point is answered in favour of accused and against the

prosecution.

20. In the result, this court found that the accused is not

guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of Indian Penal

Code and he is acquitted for the same under Section 255(1) of Criminal

Procedure Code. The bail bonds of the accused shall remain in force for

further period of six months as per Section 437-A of Criminal Procedure

Code.

Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me

in the open Court on this the 18th day of March, 2020.
Sd/-B.Devendra Reddy
Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Pakala.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR
Prosecution Defence
PW-1 : Derangula Govindu -None-
PW-2 : Derangula Hari
PW-3 : S.Narayana
PW-4 : P.Sydulla
PW-5 : Rajiya
PW-6 : Dr. P.Chandrasekhar
PW-7 : G.Venkateswara Prasad, Motor Vehicle Inspector
PW-8 : B.Suneel Kumar, the then Sub-Inspector of Police.
CC 72/2019 9 JMFC, Pakala

Exhibits marked for Prosecution:

Ex.P-1: Report
Ex.P-2: Inquest report of deceased Narayana.
Ex.P-3: Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-4.
Ex.P-4: Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW-5.
Ex.P-5: Post-Mortem Certificate of Deceased Narayana.
Ex.P-6: Motor Vehicle Inspectors Report.
Ex.P-7: First Information Report in Cr.No.60/2019 of Pakala PS
Ex.P-8: Rough sketch of the scene of offence.
Exhibits marked for Defence: NIL.

//True copy// Sd/-B.Devendra Reddy

Sd/-B.Devendra Reddy Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pakala.
Pakala.

Fair Judgment in CC No.72/2019

Dated 18-03-2020 JFCMC Pakala
CC 72/2019 10 JMFC, Pakala

IN THE COURT OF THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE -CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

OF I CLASS, PAKALA.

1. CALENDAR IN C.C. No.72/2019

2. Cr.No.60/2019 of Pakala Police Station u/s 304 of IPC

3. Name and address of the complainant and accused:

State represented by the Sub-Inspector of Police,

Pakala. …Complainant

- Versus –

Jakir khan, aged 42 years, S/o Chhote Pathan,

Hathvan village, Hivara Roshanagav Post, Jalna
District, Maharastra. …Accused

4.
Date of occurrence : 06-05-2019
Date of complaint : 06-05-2019
Date of taken on file : 10-06-2019
Date of apprehension of accused : 08-05-2019
Date of release on bail : 08-05-2019
Commitment : ---
Date of commencement of trial : 22-01-2020
Date of close of trial : 18-03-2020
Date of Sentence or Order : 18-03-2020
Sentence of Order:-
In the result, this court found the accused not guilty for the offence
punishable under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code and he is acquitted for
the same under Section 255(1) of Criminal Procedure Code. The bail bonds of
the accused shall remain in force for the further period of six months as per
Section 437-A of Criminal Procedure Code.

5. Explanation for delay : --

//True copy// Sd/-B.Devendra Reddy

Sd/-B.Devendra Reddy Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pakala.
Pakala.