1 2025:CGHC:21349 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No.164 of 2021 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through-District Magistrate, Surguja (Chhattisgarh). ... Appellant versus 1 - Shyam Das S/o Bechan Das Aged About 33 Years R/o Parri, Police Station Darima, Distt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh). ... Respondent For Appellant/State : Shri Ratan Pusty, Govt. Advocate For Respondent : Shri Sanjeev Verma, Advocate Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal Judgment On Board 08.05.2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 27.07.2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG) in Criminal Case No.769/2013, whereby, the respondent has been acquitted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC and Sections 181 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 3. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 24.07.2013 at about 15.40 Hours, the deceased, namely, Raibhan Das was coming along with his friend, namely, Mukesh from the village Amalbhiti to village SATISH TUMANE Digitally signed by SATISH TUMANE 2 Irrganwa by his motorcycle bearing Registration No.C.G.15-A-8719 and at that particular time, his vehicle was dashed vehemently by the respondent-Shyam Das while driving the alleged offending vehicle, i.e., Tractor bearing Registration No.C.G.15-AE-0753, attached with the Trolley bearing Registration No.C.G.15-TC-0446, in a rash and negligent manner. It is alleged further that on account of the alleged rash and negligent driving, the alleged incident was caused by the respondent, owing to which, the deceased-Raibhan Das sustained grievous injuries and was admitted into the District Hospital, Ambikapur, where during the course of treatment, he was died on the date of incident itself. The postmortem of the dead body of the deceased was conducted by Dr. K.R. Tekam (PW-5), who opined vide his report (Ex.P/3) that the deceased has died because of excessive bleeding due to rupture of spleen leading to cardio-respiratory arrest and based upon the alleged information furnished by the Ward Boy of the concerned Hospital, merg enquiry was registered. On the basis of merg enquiry, an FIR was registered on 28.07.2013 against the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC and charge was framed against the respondent by the trial Court under Section 304-A of IPC and Sections 181 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was denied by him and claimed to be tried. 4. The trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, held that the respondent was not involved in connection with the alleged crime and accordingly, he has been acquitted from the offence mentioned herein-above and being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred. 3 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/State submits that the finding of the trial Court holding that the respondent is not the author of the alleged crime, is apparently contrary to the materials available on record, in as much as, the evidence led by the prosecution, was not scanned in its proper manner and thereby, erred in acquitting the respondent as such. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal as passed by the trial Court. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 8. From perusal of the record, it appears that the respondent has been charge-sheeted with regard to the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC as also under Sections 181 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is alleged by the prosecution that on the fateful day i.e. 24.07.2013 at about 15.40 Hours, the respondent, while driving the alleged offending vehicle, i.e., Tractor bearing Registration No.C.G.15- AE-0753, attached with its Trolley bearing Registration No.C.G.15-TC- 0446 respectively, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the motorcycle bearing Registration No.C.G.15-A-8719, which was being driven by the deceased-Raibhan Das, on the fateful day, who sustained the grievous injuries and died on the said day itself. 9. In order to establish the alleged fact, Sona Bai (PW-1), Anju Das (PW- 2), Samudri Bai (PW-3) and Aviran Das (PW-4) were examined as they were travelling in the alleged Tractor. According to their testimonies, it appears that on the said fateful day, the alleged offending vehicle was 4 being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, but, none of them have, however, identified the vehicle in question, nor were able to state the number of the said offending vehicle. That apart, the vehicle in question, seized much after the occurrence of the alleged incident i.e. on 07.08.2013, but, neither the attesting witnesses of it, nor the Investigating Officer, were examined, so as to hold that the alleged offending vehicle was seized on account of the alleged incident. In view thereof, the trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, has not committed any illegality in acquitting the respondent from the commission of the alleged crime, so as to call for any interference in this appeal. 10. The appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed at the admission stage itself. SD/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE Tumane