Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt Sumitra vs State And Anr (2025:Rj-Jd:13234) on 10 March, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:13234]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 704/2018
Smt. Sumitra W/o Shri Shyam Sunder Sharma, By Caste
Brahmin, Resident Of 923, Devi Nagar, New Sanganer Road,
Sodala, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor.
2. Kanaram S/o Shri Doonga Ram Jat, Resident Of 224,
Manu Enclave, Near Saibaba Temple, Vijaypura, Nanosar,
Police Station Karghani, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naresh Khatri
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A. with
Mr. R.S. Bhati
Mr. Jaidev Singh Bhati
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
10/03/2025
1. By way of filing the instant misc. petition, challenge has been
made to the order dated 18.09.2017 passed by learned
District and Session Judge, Pratapgarh in Criminal Revision
Petition No.37/2017 whereby the order dated 08.05.2017
passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh was
affirmed and an application filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
on behalf of the petitioner was rejected.
2. The petitioner happens to be complainant of a case in which
after investigation charge-sheet came to be submitted for
offence under Sections 279 & 304A of IPC and Sections
146/196 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The charge-sheet came
[2025:RJ-JD:13234] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-704/2018]
to be submitted only against accused Shivlal who was driving
a motorcycle and hit the deceased as a consequence of
which deceased Shyamsundar died.
3. Succinctly stated the facts fo the case are that the deceased
was traveling in a bus bearing registration No.RJ-14-PB-1001
which made a stop at Aamli Ghat place. Some of the
passengers alighted from the vehicle to answer the nature's
call. While alighting from the bus, the accused Shivlal who
was driving the motorcycle negligently hit the deceased as a
consequence of which bus passenger Shyamlal received
injuries and then succumbed to death.
4. During the course of the trial, the petitioner moved an
application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for arraigning the
driver of the bus Kanharam also as an accused to try
together with accused Shivlal. The application came to be
submitted after recording of five prosecution witnesses. The
learned Magistrate dismissed the application under Section
319 Cr.P.C. after discussing the material particularly
statement of Head Constable Rameshwarlal, the purported
accused PW-8 Kanharam, the site memo, the first report
Ex.P-3 lodged at the instance of Ashish Sharma PW-5. The
learned trial Court observed that there was no sufficient
material to implead bus driver Kanharam also as an accused
so as to put him to trial along with already charge-sheeted
accused Shivlal.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the order dated 08.05.2017 and the other material.
[2025:RJ-JD:13234] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-704/2018]
6. In a subsequent development, after passing of the order
dated 08.05.2017 and even rejection of the revision petition
preferred on behalf of the petitioner, the trial has culminated
into an acquittal of accused Shivlal and as a matter of fact
no proceeding is pending before the trial.
7. Shri Naresh Khatri, learned counsel for the petitioner has
candidly admitted that the judgment of acquittal has not
been made to challenge on their behalf.
8. I have also had a cursory look over the judgment dated
22.05.2017 whereby the accused Shivlal was acquitted from
the charges.
9. The law in this regard is no more res integra that if sufficient
material is brought on record, the Court has ample power to
array the other persons also as an accused who has not
been charge-sheeted and he may be directed to be tried
along with the charge-sheeted accused. Enunciation of law in
this regard has been made in the judgment passed by
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Hardeep Singh
Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 3 SCC 92
whereafter the issue involved in this case was further
discussed in the case of Sukhpal Singh Khaira Vs. State of
Punjab In Criminal Appeal No.885 of 2019 arising out of
SLP (CRL.) NO.9063 of 2017, which are squarely applicable
in this case.
10. After having a look over the material brought on record the
first information report, the charge-sheet, the statements of
five witnesses, the site memo and the information of the
Investigating Officer which; in an unequivocal and
[2025:RJ-JD:13234] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-704/2018]
unambiguous term; indicated about availability of material
for doing trial regarding negligence of accused Shivlal who
was driving the motorcycle with rash and could not take care
of the fact that the deceased Shyamsunder was alighting
from the bus. There were several passengers in the bus
some of them were examined in the trial. There is no dispute
that the bus took a stop for the purpose of giving relax to
the passengers. Some of the passengers alighting and then
embarked in the bus and only whereafter it was supposed to
run. The fatal hit to the deceased was made on the road out
side the bus and therefore the bus driver cannot be booked
for prosecution of negligent driving.
11. After taking into account the totality of facts and
circumstances, the material brought on record and
particularly taking into account the fact that the trial has
been culminated vide order dated 22.05.2017 I do not deem
it appropriate to exceed to the prayer made by the
petitioner. No case is made out for interference.
12. Accordingly, the instant misc. petition is dismissed.
13. Stay petition also stands dismissed.
14. Record be sent back.
(FARJAND ALI),J
3-Samvedana/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
