Rigours of UAPA Melt Before Article 21: Jharkhand High Court Grants Bail After Six Years of Incarceration Accused Cannot Challenge in Arguments What He Never Challenged in Cross-Examination: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds POCSO Conviction Counterblast Plea, Civil Dispute Defence No Shield When Cognizable Offence Is Disclosed: Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Ex-Driver Accused Of Outraging Modesty Lawyers Who Burned a Colleague's Furniture for Defending Toll Workers Have Tainted a Noble Profession: Supreme Court A Suspicious Dying Declaration Cannot Hang a Man: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Murder Conviction IQ of 65, Memory Loss, Frontal Lobe Damage: Supreme Court Holds Brain-Injured Manager Suffered 100% Functional Disability, Enhances Compensation to ₹97.73 Lakh Cannot Be Forced to Pay Gratuity to Retired Employees Who Refuse to Vacate Company Quarters: Supreme Court Victim Who Incited Riot Inside Court Cannot Blame Accused for Trial Delay: Supreme Court Grants Bail in Section 307 Case You Cannot Sell What You Don’t Own: ‘Vendor’s Half Share Means Buyer Gets Only Half’ : Andhra Pradesh High Court Nagaland's Oil Laws Face Constitutional Challenge: Gauhati High Court Sends Union-State Dispute to Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 3 CPC | Will's Validity Cannot Be Decided in Substitution Proceedings: Himachal Pradesh High Court 6-Year-Old Loses Arm To Live 11kV Wire Passing 'Almost Touching' Her Balcony: Punjab & Haryana High Court Awards Rs. 99.93 Lakh To Child Despite Nigam Blaming Father For 'Extending Balcony' Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 To Quash Rape & POCSO Conviction After Marriage Between Accused And Victim NGT Cannot Order Demolition of Temple On Ground of Encroachment of Park: Supreme Court Quashes Removal Order For Want of Jurisdiction Hostile Witnesses & Doubtful Recovery Can Collapse Prosecution: J&K High Court Sets High Threshold for Criminal Proof Compassion Cannot Override the Clock: Karnataka HC Denies Job to Guardian Aunt Despite 2021 Rule Change” Second Marriage During Pendency of Divorce Appeal Is Void: Kerala High Court Appearing in Exam Does Not Cure Attendance Deficiency: MP High Court Upholds 'Year Down' Against BBA Student With Sub-30% Attendance Patna High Court Directs Bihar To Submit Detailed Rehabilitation Plan For Recovered Mental Health Patients, Expand Half-Way Homes Across State Rajasthan High Court Upholds Refusal to Drop Bharat Band Stone-Pelting Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Acquits Ginder Singh in Hit-and-Run Case, Citing Probable Defense

03 September 2024 10:23 AM

By: Admin


In a significant verdict, the Punjab and Haryana High Court acquitted Ginder Singh, the appellant in a hit-and-run case, overturning the concurrent finding of conviction by the lower courts. Justice Deepak Gupta, presiding over the case, pronounced the judgment on May 10, 2023, granting the accused the benefit of doubt based on the highly probable defense presented.

The case revolved around an incident that occurred on July 9, 2003, wherein Ginder Singh was alleged to have driven a PRTC bus that collided with a scooter, resulting in the deaths of Rattan Kumar and Kamlesh Kaur. The incident took place near Village Rajgarh in Patiala, Punjab.

The lower court had convicted Ginder Singh under Sections 304-A (causing death by negligence) and 279 (rash driving) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, after careful examination of the evidence and testimonies, found inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses' version and deemed the defense's account as highly probable.

Justice Deepak Gupta, in his judgment, noted that the prosecution witnesses' statements appeared highly improbable when analyzed in light of the site plan and the location of the vehicles involved in the accident. The defense's argument, supported by independent witnesses who were passengers on the bus, suggested that the deceased scooter driver had turned abruptly without signaling, making it impossible for the accused to avoid the collision.

The court emphasized the duty to analyze the testimonies of both prosecution and defense witnesses on equal parameters to assess their truthfulness. In this case, the defense's version was found to be highly probable and supported by reliable witnesses, leading to the acquittal of Ginder Singh.

This verdict highlights the importance of considering the defense's perspective and ensuring the principle of "innocent until proven guilty." The court's decision to grant the benefit of doubt to the accused showcases the judiciary's commitment to upholding fairness and justice.

It is noteworthy that no specific cases were referred to in the judgment, indicating that the decision was based on the evaluation of the evidence and testimonies presented in this particular case.

The acquittal of Ginder Singh in this hit-and-run case serves as a reminder of the critical role played by the courts in ensuring a fair and just legal system, where every individual is given a fair chance to present their defense and benefit from the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Decided on: 10.05.2023

Ginder Singh - vs State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News