- (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for non-petitioner No. 2 and the learned counsel for non-petitioner No. 2.
(2.) This criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the order dated 1st July, 1996 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh in Criminal Revision No. 44/96 whereby he accepted the revision petition and set aside the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh, on 23rd January, 1996. By the aforesaid order dated 23rd January, 1996 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarah took cognizance of the offences punishable under Section 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of final report submitted under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code in relation to Criminal Case No. 650/95 registered at Police Station, Hanumangarh.
(3.) The facts of the case may be briefly summarised as below : On 1st December, 1995 at 10.45 a.m. Yudhishtar lodged a First Information Report at the Police Station, Hanumangarh in which he stated that on previous night he along with Gajendra, Vijay, Mahavir Prasad and Hanuman Singh was going in a Maruti car to Dungarpur in order to attend the marriage of his niece and the car was being driven by Dharmveer alias Billu. When the car reached beyond Shergarh bus stand the car was turned upside down and in consequence the first information Yudhishtar and other persons who were sitting in the car received injuries. The injured persons were taken to Sainy hospital in a truck where they were given medical treatment. The condition of Hanuman Singh was serious, he was therefore shifted to Government Hospital, Hanumangarh, where in spite of medical treatment the expired. It was also alleged in the First Information Report that the car was being driven by Dharamveer in a negligent manner and the unfortunate accident occurred due to negligent driving of the car by Dharamveer. Police registered a case under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and conducted investigation. The car was seized by the Police and it was mechanically inspected by a Police Officer who found that the car was damaged at several places and the rear of the car was also damaged. During investigation the first informant Yudhishtar submitted an application in writing duly signed by him in which he had stated that a truck whose number could not be known had hit the maruti car from the rear side and because of that, unfortunate accident occurred. Almost all the witnesses who were examined under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code gave a story to the effect that a truck had hit the maruti car from behind and, therefore, maruti car could not be controlled and turned upside down. As a consequence Police submitted a final report stating therein that truck which had hit maruti car from behind could not be identified and it was not feasible to keep the investigation pending. Obviously the Police Officer was of the opinion that Dharamveer who was at the time of accident driving the car was not rash or negligent in driving the car.;