Alok Aradhe, J. - (1.) Condl (Cr) No. 30/2013 Heard. 1.2 After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and for the reasons assigned in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, we find that sufficient cause for condonation of delay of 140 days in filing the criminal acquittal appeal is made out. In the result, delay is condoned. 1.3 Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is disposed of. SLAA No.38/2013 1.4 After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, we deem it appropriate to grant leave to file Criminal Acquittal Appeal. Accordingly, leave is granted. 1.5 SLAA is disposed of. 1.6 Criminal Acquittal Appeal is taken up on board. Cr. Acquittal Appeal No. 46/2013 1.7 This Criminal Acquittal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 06.08.2012 passed by the trial court, by which the respondent has been acquitted of offence under sections 279/337/304-A, RPC.
(2.) The prosecution story in nutshell is that on 20.01.2006, the police authorities of Police Station, Kathua learnt from reliable source that a Tipper driven rashly and negligently by the respondent, knocked down two persons, namely Pappi and Babu Din near the CTM factory while reversing, as a result of which both of them sustained injuries. The Police authorities took cognizance of the matter and registered a case for offence under sections 279 & 337, RPC. On account of the death of injured, Babu Din, an offence under section 304-A, RPC was added to the case during course of investigation. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was presented in the Court against the respondent for the offences as aforesaid.
(3.) The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined as many as six witnesses, namely, Som Raj, Hasham Ali, Mohan Lal Ram Milan Pappy, Balbir Singh. The trial court vide impugned judgment has acquitted the respondent of the aforesaid offences.;