Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bheru Lal @ Bheru Singh vs State on 7 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLR-321/2016]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 321/2016
Bheru Lal @ Bheru Singh
----Petitioner
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.S. Deora.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
07/04/2022
In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its
highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being
maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of
all concerned.
The revision petition has been preferred claiming the
following reliefs:-
"It is therefore humbly prayed that the revision
petition may kindly be allowed and the judgments
passed by both the courts below may kindly be
quashed and set aside and the petitioner may kindly
be acquitted from the charges"
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident
occurred on 01.04.2007 at about 6:15 P.M. when the complainant
was going on his motorcycle he saw that a bus bearing
registration No.RJ-22-PA-0079 met with an accident, resulting into
the passengers were sustained injuries, an FIR No.48/2007 under
Sections 279, 337, 338 & 304 (A) of the IPC was lodged, 10
(Downloaded on 08/04/2022 at 08:37:05 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLR-321/2016]
witnesses were examined in the case and the 20 documents were
exhibited.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
injured eye-witness PW7- Mohan Lal has stated that for avoiding
collision with another vehicle, the bus had to give way from the
road and the accident was caused. The witness received fracture
and serious injuries in the backbone.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention
of this Court towards the statement of PW-8 Sua Devi, in which,
she stated that her son Dharmendra was injured but has not
supported the case of the negligence. The statements of PW-9
Santosh is also on the similar pedestal. PW-1 Nizamuddin & PW-2
Surendra Kumar have identified the spot and the deceased. PW-3
Rinku, in her statement, also does not say anything about rash
and negligent driving. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also
drawn attention towards the statement of PW-4 Dr. Balchand
Gulechha, who is the doctor. The PW-5 Karanpal Singh is a police
constable, who went upon the report of accident having been
received; PW-6 Pratapvan is only witness, who has supported the
case of the prosecution but he was neither in the bus and nor
injured.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case beyond
reasonable doubt. The witnesses and the exhibits do not support
the rash and negligent driving. Learned counsel for the petitioner
also submits that the petitioner has undergone the custody of
about 28 days.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the revision petition.
(Downloaded on 08/04/2022 at 08:37:05 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLR-321/2016]
This Court, upon hearing the submission of learned counsel
for the parties and perusing the record as well as the impugned
order, is of the opinion that 9 witnesses out of 10 witnesses have
nothing to say about the rash and negligent driving even when
some of them were travelling in the same bus and were severely
injured in the accident. Only Prosecution Witness No.6 is
supporting the incident but he was not travelling in the bus and
was not an injured witness.
This Court specially takes note of the deposition of PW-7
Mohan Lal, who has categorically stated in his statement that it
was to avoid a collision with the vehicle coming from the front that
vehicle had to be brought down from the road, and thus, the
accident happened. This Court also finds that the prosecution has
failed to prove his case beyond doubt and learned court below has
presumed the rash and negligence.
In view of the above, the revision petition is allowed and
order dated 12.02.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate
No.1, Pali in Criminal Original Case No.4891/2010 (State of
Rajasthan Vs. Bheru Lal convicting and sentencing the accused-
petitioner and the order dated 10.03.2016 passed by learned
Special Judge SC & ST Cases, Pali in Criminal Appeal No. 1/2016
(34/2015) (Bheru Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan) rejecting the
petitioner's appeal, are hereby quashed and set aside. The
accused petitioner is acquitted of the charges. Petitioner is on bail.
His bonds are discharged.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
50-Sudheer/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
