15-als-55-2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 55 OF 2019 (Leave to file appeal) The State of Maharashtra … Applicant vs. Sunil Sampat Sangale … Respondent Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for the Applicant Ms. Vaishnavi Nagargoje i/b. Ms. Preeti Walimbe, for Respondent. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 7th NOVEMBER 2025 ORDER: 1. This application is filed by the State under Section 378(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (‘Cr. PC’) for leave to file an appeal against the order acquitting the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. 2. Learned APP submits that two eyewitnesses were examined to support the prosecution’s case that the accused was driving the luxury bus at high speed, which caused the accident. She submits that the deceased persons, i.e. two men and two women were travelling in the Maruti Car along with a 8 year old child. The adult Page no. 1 of 5 varsha VARSHA VIJAY RAJGURU Digitally signed by VARSHA VIJAY RAJGURU Date: 2025.11.14 18:28:02 +0530 15-als-55-2019.doc persons succumbed to the injury, and only the child survived the accident. She submits that there is sufficient evidence to show that the luxury bus was travelling at high speed, which caused the accident. Since both vehicles were travelling in opposite directions, the high speed of the luxury bus caused it to collide with the car coming from the opposite direction. The eyewitnesses have stated that the luxury bus driven by the accused was travelling at high speed and dashed into the Maruti car. She also relied upon the spot panchanama and evidence of PW-3 to prove it. 3. Learned APP submits that the accused himself has informed about the accident, and there is no doubt about the identification of the accused that he was driving the luxury bus that caused the accident. Considering the impact of the accident, the four adult persons in the car succumbed to the injuries, and thus, the rash and negligent driving of the accused has caused death. Hence, the oral evidence produced on record is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. Hence, according to the learned APP, there is sufficient evidence on record to prove the guilt and thus, leave be granted to file an appeal. 4. I have perused the evidence on record. It is the prosecution’s case that on 15th May 2009, the accused was driving a luxury bus Page no. 2 of 5 15-als-55-2019.doc on the Nashik-Pune Highway and a Maruti car was coming from the opposite direction, around 2:00 pm, near a Dhaba named ‘Rajesh’. The luxury bus dashed into a Maruti car, resulting in the death of four adult persons and a child of 8 years was injured. The accused reported the incident to the concerned police station, and the panchanama was recorded. There were two eyewitnesses whose statements were recorded to support the prosecution’s case, which alleged that the accident occurred due to the accused's rash and negligent driving. 5. The prosecution examined two eyewitnesses and PW-3 to support the spot panchanama. The Investigating Officer was examined as PW-4. Though the eyewitnesses have stated that the luxury bus was driven at high speed, except for oral evidence, there is no other supporting evidence on record to show that the bus was driven beyond the permissible speed. The evidence further indicates that the prosecution did not investigate the medical evidence of the car's driver. The prosecution did not investigate the speed of the Maruti car and whether the driver of the car was under the influence of liquor at the relevant time of the accident. There is no evidence that the accused was under the influence of liquor, which caused the accident. Thus, based on the oral evidence on record, the trial court Page no. 3 of 5 15-als-55-2019.doc held that the allegations regarding rash and negligent driving by the accused are doubtful. Therefore, the guilt was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 6. The fact that the accused informed the concerned police station is also an important aspect to be considered, and thus, the conduct of the accused was considered to be that of a law-abiding person. Thus, considering that the prosecution’s case is based on the ocular evidence and there is no material regarding the medical examination of the accused and the car driver, the trial court has raised doubt on the prosecution’s case regarding the rash and negligent driving of the accused. 7. On perusal of the evidence, no material is seen to have been produced by the prosecution that the driving of the accused is rash and negligent, which has caused the accident. Thus, the view taken by the trial court, which raises doubt about the accused's guilt, is a plausible one. It is a well-established legal principle that when two views are possible based on the evidence on record, there can be no interference with the order of acquittal only on the ground that some other view is possible. 8. Considering the evidence on record, the view taken by the trial court is a plausible view that could have been taken based on Page no. 4 of 5 15-als-55-2019.doc the evidence on record. There can be interference in an appeal against acquittal if, after reappreciation of evidence, the only conclusion that could be drawn is that the guilt of the accused is proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In the present case, there is no ground for granting leave to file an appeal against the order of acquittal. (GAURI GODSE, J.) Page no. 5 of 5