news details |
|
|
| Court denies bail to driver accused of killing 7 pedestrians | | | Jammu, Sept 28: First Additional Session Judge, GK Pandita has rejected the bail application of the matador driver who claimed at least seven lives and wounded more than half a dozen persons by his rash and negligent driving near Digiana area of Jammu.
Identified as Pushpinder Singh son of Hira Singh resident of Rahya Teh.Samba, Jammu, the accused was already denied bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 16-09-2006.
Denying bail to the accused the court observed that from the material on record, accused has cause d two accidents on August 827, 2006 while driving the vehicle towards Jammu on Jammu-Pathankot National Highway.
The first accident is alleged to have been caused by the accused at a place near Digiana Camp, where two pedestrians were moved down by the vehicle, observed the court adding it was the moral duty of the accused driver to shift the victims for their treatment to the hospital. However, the accused instead of fulfilling his moral obligation accelerated the speed of the vehicle and went towards Jammu.
On reaching Digiana Ashram, the driver against knocked down seven more persons out of which five persons died on the spot, while two are reported to be struggling for their lives. The court further observed that the vehicle was being driven so rashly and at such a high speed that it turned turtle after hitting the pedestrians near the Ashram.
“It appears that the accused has converted the vehicle from a public carrier into instrument for knocking down and killing innocent persons and was thus on a killing mission”, the court observed adding the alleged act of the accused has sent shock waves among Jammuites.
The court observed that the act of the accused has taken seven precious lives and thus plunged seven families into a pall of gloom. Granting bail to the accused at his stage will shatter the faith of the public in criminal justice system as such public interest demands that bail should not be granted to the accused at this state, the court observed further. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
