India News | Death by Negligence Charge Against Man Quashed, Sessions Court Terms Magisterial Court Order 'illegal', 'perverse'

New Delhi, Oct 31 (PTI) Mere suspicion cannot take shape of proof as per the law of evidence, a sessions court here has said, setting aside a magisterial court's summons to a man charged with rash driving and causing death by negligence while terming it "illegal" and "perverse".

Hearing a revision petition against a magisterial court's order summoning Harjeet Singh Kandhar, the sessions court also discharged the man of the offences.

Also Read | Red Light on Gaadi off: Delhi Govt Resubmits File 'With Evidence' for LG Vinai Kumar Saxena's Nod.

The magisterial court had earlier summoned Kandhar after taking cognizance of the offences of rash driving, causing hurt and grievous hurt by acts which endanger human life and causing death by negligence.

Additional Sessions Judge Prashant Sharma, however, in a recent order said, "Law requires proof of particular facts, based on which, a person can be summoned and mere suspicion, cannot take the shape of proof as per the law of evidence."

Also Read | Workforce Reduction: Overall Job Cuts No More Than 5% To Avoid Role Duplication, Says BYJU's CEO Raveendran.

“Impugned order dated April 5, 2019, passed by the trial court, therefore, is illegal and perverse and the same stands set aside. The revisionist is discharged from the case," the judge added.

The court said the report filed by police only indicated a remote suspicion regarding the involvement of Kandhar in the alleged crime and no conclusive or believable evidence was present on the record.

So, the magisterial court had not properly applied its judicial mind before summoning him, it said.

The sessions court noted that according to the charge sheet, police found the victim in an injured condition on May 15, 2016, and was declared brought dead at a government hospital.

“I failed to understand what was the categorical evidence which prima facie indicated that the revisionist was the culprit, who had committed the alleged accident,” the additional sessions judge said, noting there was no eye witness or CCTV footage of the incident.

Further, the witnesses did not specifically say that it was Kandhar who was driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged accident, the judge said.

Call details records of Kandhar, his wife and his driver were collected but there was nothing to suggest their involvement in the incident, the court said.

It noted that the statements of one of the witnesses were vague and could not be made grounds to conclude that it was Kandhar who was driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged accident.

The court also said according to the investigating officer's report, the mechanical inspection report of the said vehicle did not provide any conclusive evidence regarding the involvement of the vehicle in the incident.

The Kotla Mubarakpur police station had registered an FIR against Kandhar under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of the victim Satpal in a road accident.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)