TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (11) TMI 254
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... refreshment A Maruti Car bearing No. HYU-9808 was parked and the two sons of the informant parked their motorcycle in front of the said car. In the meantime, the accused Manoj Kumar came and sat in his car aforesaid. But due to cycles and motorcycle aforesaid parked there, he could not take out his Maruti car and he started blowing the horn of his car continuously . He also started abusing loudly as to why those cycles and motorcycle had been parked there. As soon as Chetan heard abuses, he came to remove the motorcycle and asked the accused not to hurl abuses. There was exchange of hot words. Rohan also reached near the car, after parking the motorcycle, but exchange of hot words continued. The accused threatened both of them saying, "Come out of Bahadurgarh. I will see you." Rohan retorted, "What you will see us outside? See us here." The accused repeated, "Come outside. I will kill both of you." Thereafter the accused went away, but Rohan and Chetan remained there in front of the said shop out of fear. On enquiry, Rohan and Chetan learnt that the name of accused was Manoj Kumar and he was the son of Surat Singh, who was a property dealer in Bdhadurgarh. Rohan also noted down th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a tractor-trolley to save themselves. In the meanwhile, Chetan came down from the motorcycle and wanted to go behind the tractor-trolley to take shelter. The accused hit Chetan who was on the road by the right side of his car with force. Thereafter the car proceeded in great speed grazing with the tractor-trolley. Because of the impact, Chetan was thrown from the road inside the trolley. Seeing the serious condition of Chetan, Rohan stopped a matador, driven by one Vinod Kumar of Rohtak and asked him to take him to the hospital because his brother's condition was serious. Chetan was put in the matador and Rohan followed the matador on his motorcycle. Chetan reached hospital at 9.30 P.M. and after half an hour he was declared dead. Col. Ajit Singh Saharan the father of the victim was informed, who proceeded from Delhi to Rohtak. The first information report was lodged at about 11.15 A.M. on June 23, 1988, by the father of the victim. It is said that Rohan, because of the shock, virtually remained unconscious throughout the night and at 9.00 A.M. he starting narrating the details of the occurrence, to his father, the informant. In the first information report all the aforesaid f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. However, as already stated above, the High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused-respondent and acquitted him of the charges levelled against him. 6. On behalf of the State, it was pointed out that there was no reason for the High Court to reject the evidence of Rohan (PW-14), the brother of the deceased whose presence at the time of the occurrence and his going from Delhi to Rohtak along with the deceased, was never questioned by the accused during the trial. It was urged that the circumstantial evidence collected during investigation, fully supported the case of the prosecution. 7. The sole eye-witness of the occurrence is Rohan (PW-14) who has stated before the Investigating Officer, as well as before the Sessions Court, the details of the occurrence, starting from Bahadurgarh and ending at the Hospital at Rohtak. The other "witnesses and circumstances only corroborate the statement of Rohan (PW-14). According to us, the High Court should have first examined as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence of Rohan (PW-14) should be accepted. It appears that the High Court mainly considered....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dence of Rohan (PW-14) has been demolished. The High Court has simply quoted the evidence of Rohan (PW-14), but has given no reason why it should be rejected. The High Court has observed only "that the evidence of the eye-witness in the court was a belated attempt to improve their testimony and bring the same in line with the Doctor's evidence with a view to support an incorrect case." 9. On the person of deceased, 11 injuries were found during post-mortem. Most of the injuries were on the left side of his body which is consistent only with the case of the prosecution that while Chetan was standing on the road, the accused knocked him down by the right side of the car, causing injury on the left side of Chetan. He was thrown on the trolley. The trolley was carrying agricultural implements which caused some of incised wounds which were found on the person of Chetan during post mortem examination. During the cross-examination of Rohan (PW-14), the suggestions which had been given, on behalf of the accused, do not dispute the case of prosecution that both brothers left Delhi on the motorcycle. The High Court committed a grave error in rejecting the evidence of Rohan (PW-14). The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uring the night itself. PW-13, father of the victim, who is a military officer, has stated on oath, that he got the information from Rohtak at about 2,00 or 2.15 in the night and he immediately proceeded for Rohtak and reached there at about 4.00 or 4.15 in the morning. He found Rohan (PW-14) in his house at Rohtak, but he was "beside" (not in his seases) and was lying on a "Charpai". At about 9.00 A.M., in the morning he tried to know the full details from his son Rohan and then he lodged the first information report on the basis of the facts narrated by his son Rohan. We find hardly any reason to doubt the evidence of the informant (PW-13). It is true that time factor has an important role in context with lodging of a first information report. But, if the prosecution explains the delay satisfactorily, the Court is not expected to reject the whole prosecution case merely on that ground. The present case is one-such case where taking all facts and circumstances into consideration, the prosecution case cannot be rejected on the ground that the first information report was not lodged during the night. The agony of the mother of the deceased and other members of the family at Rohtak i....