Police theory in rash driving case falls flat, man acquitted

A local court acquitted a person arrested in a rash driving case after the prosecution failed to prove the charges framed against him.

The case was registered under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code at the Sarangpur police station on December 9, 2018.

In a complaint, Head Constable Ranbir Singh stated that Constable Rakesh and Lady Constable Bharti Rawat were deputed in view of an examination to be held in a school. Around 3.15 pm, a car coming from the Mullanpur side hit Constable Bharti Rawat. The car was being driven rashly and negligently. The victim fell on the bonnet of the car and hit its windscreen before falling off.

The complainant stated that he and Constable Rakesh rushed to her help. The woman cop sustained severe injuries in the accident and was rushed to the PGIMER in a private vehicle. The car driver identified himeself as Harjinder Singh.

After completion of the investigation, the police filed a chargesheet in the court. On finding a prima facie case, the accused was charged under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the IPC to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.

The Public Prosecutor argued that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Jasbir Singh Dadwal, the counsel for the accused, argued that the charge of rash, speedy and negligent driving remained unproved on the part of the prosecution.

After hearing of the arguments, Parmod Kumar, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh, stated that it was a settled principle of law that the burden of proof in a criminal trial never shifted and remained on the prosecution.

The court observed that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt. The presence of the complainant on the spot was doubtful. It was not depicted anywhere in the site plan. The investigating officer has also admitted that the site plan did not mention the place where HC Ranbir saw the accident. The injured constable also failed to prove the identity of the accused. Moreover, there was no eyewitness to the rash and negligent driving of the accused which led to the accident.

There were various lacunas, which shattered the case of the prosecution. Accordingly, the accused was hereby acquitted of the charges levelled against him by giving him the benefit of doubt, the court ruled.