HC raps F’bad court for casual handling

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 11

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rapped Faridabad judicial magistrates for treating a fatal accident case in a casual manner.

Justice Kuldip Singh asserted that close scrutiny of the lower court file showed that the accident case involving a roadways bus and a scooter was tried in a casual manner by different magistrates by granting long adjournments and without trying to enforce the presence of witnesses.

A perusal of interim orders showed that long adjournments were granted, mostly for about six months, after the charges were framed on July 6, 2004. Once, an adjournment was granted for nine months.

The case was registered after the bus the accused was driving hit the scooter SP Gupta was riding on February 29, 2004. Gupta succumbed to his injuries on March 5.

Justice Kuldip Singh made it clear that the law on rash and negligent driving was required to be enforced with an iron hand as more than 400 persons died in road accidents and three times more injured everyday in India.

Bus driver Bijender Singh had moved the High Court after Faridabad Judicial Magistrate First Class convicted him for rash driving, causing death by negligence and other offences before sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for one year. The Bench was told that the Faridabad Additional Sessions Judge had reduced the sentence to nine months on his appeal.

Referring to the interim orders, Justice Kuldip Singh added that it was simply recorded that one or two prosecution witnesses were examined and the rest remained unexamined.

They were ordered to be summoned, without recording whether any or all prosecution witnesses were served or not. In none of the orders were coercive steps taken to enforce the presence of witnesses.

Justice Kuldip Singh added, “The perusal of the challan shows that there were 11 witnesses. Different magistrates at different times summoned all prosecution witnesses without noticing whether the court would be in a position to examine all prosecution witnesses if they are served.

“Thereafter, without taking any coercive steps to procure the presence of witnesses, not being served or not coming forward, the process of granting last opportunity was started. After recording that four last opportunities were granted, evidence was closed by order. This is a casual approach to deal with the case involving death of a human being.”

Dismissing the petition, Justice Kuldip Singh asserted that the court did not find any ground to reduce the sentence or release the petitioner on probation.