Judgment : The complainant and the brother of the deceased, by name Lawrence, who was examined as P.W.1 before learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram in C.C.No.530 of 1987 is the revision petitioner herein, who challenged the propriety and legality of the impugned judgment of acquittal made by learned Judicial Magistrate in the abovesaid case on 6. 1990, acquitting the first respondent from the offences under Sec.304-A of the Indian Penal Code and Secs. 86(2) and 106 read with 112 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. At about 4.45 p.m. on 9. 1987, when P.W.1 by name Lawrence and his younger brother Rajen, after the schooling was over, were returning on the road in between Thiruparappu and Kaliyal and also the electric posts F-11/95 and F-11/160 towards south on its left side, the car bearing registration number T.N.I. 3435, driven by the first respondent/accused in arash and negligent manner, without sounding horn, coming from Kaliyal, dashed against the deceased, as a result of which he sustained injuries on his head, leg, thighs and knees and consequently, he was taken to the Government Hospital, Kottar in the same vehicle by the first respondent/ accused along with one Nesamani and Murugappan and they reached the hospital, where the doctor after initial treatment pronounced at the deceased passed away at about 7.00 p.m. itself. P.W.2 Rajamani has supported the case of P.W. 1 and in fact, rendered all corroboration to the claim of P.W.1. P.W.3 Dr.Sathiavathi Devi claimed that at about 11.50 a.m. on the next day viz., 9. 1987 she conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased Rajan and found the following injuries: 1. Sutured wound over the left parietal region 1" in length. Two sutures present. 2. Defermity of the right thigh due to fracture. 3. Broad abrasion over the anterior aspect of left thigh 4" x 4". Clotted blood present. 4. Abrasion over the anterior aspect of left by upper 1/3rd 1" x 2". Clotted blood present. 5. Small abrasion over the anterior aspect of middle of right thigh 1/2" x 1/2". She found fracture on the right thigh with clotted blood of 500 grams. She also found blood clot in the brain. She is of the opinion that the deceased would have died due to the injury on his head, about 24 hours prior to the post-mortem examination. Ex. P-1 is the post-mortem certificate issued by P.W.3. She found fracture on the right thigh with clotted blood of 500 grams. She also found blood clot in the brain. She is of the opinion that the deceased would have died due to the injury on his head, about 24 hours prior to the post-mortem examination. Ex. P-1 is the post-mortem certificate issued by P.W.3. P.W.4 gave evidence which probably may not be in support of the prosecution. P.W.5 is the attestor of the observation mahazar Ex.P-2 prepared at about 3.00 p.m. by the Sub Inspector of Police, Thakkalai, The bloodstained earth and grass M.O. 1, tiffin box M.O.2 and books and notes M.O.3 series, were recovered under the cover the Ex.P-3 P.W.6 is another doctor who speaks to the factum of giving treatment to the deceased boy by 7.00 p.m., but his treatment ended in vain and the patient passed away. P.W.7 Dr. Natarajan attached to the Government Hospital, Kottar, admitted the deceased for treatment and sent intimation Ex.P-4 to the Kottar Traffic Police Station about the admission of the injured boy. P.W.8 declines to say anything and he was treated as hostile. 3. Except the aforesaid witnesses, no other persons were examined on behalf of the prosecution, including the Motor Vehicles Inspector, Head Constable who registered the first information report and the Sub Inspector of Police, who prepared the first information report or the Inspector of Police who did the investigation in this case. It was stated that though summons were sent to those witnesses with the final notice since they did not come, the prosecution was closed. However, on the examination of the accused under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the basis of the incriminating portion of the evidence available against him, the accused denied his complicity of the offence in toto. 4. Taking into consideration some contradictions found in between the oral testimony of P.Ws. 1 and 2 the rough sketch and the observation mahazar prepared by the Investigating Officer, though they need not be placed with much reliance, learned trial Magistrate has observed that the testimony of the two eyewitnesses cannot at all be believed. 4. Taking into consideration some contradictions found in between the oral testimony of P.Ws. 1 and 2 the rough sketch and the observation mahazar prepared by the Investigating Officer, though they need not be placed with much reliance, learned trial Magistrate has observed that the testimony of the two eyewitnesses cannot at all be believed. What is perturbing in my mind, while looking into the order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate is that in the context of no evidence given by police officers, that too, particularly, they did not come to the Court at all to give evidence, reliance placed by learned Magistrate on the statements recorded under Sec. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure goes to the very fabric of the fundamentals of the criminal jurisprudence. On more than one occasion, it appears that learned Magistrate has placed reliance upon the statements recorded under Sec. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and compared that with the oral testimony of P.Ws. 1 and 2, which in my respectful view is a total error amounting to not only a mistake of law, but also the fundamental of the criminal juristic system is not being followed in this case. .5. For the reasons known to them, investigating staff, including the Inspector of Police, who investigated the case, the Sub Inspector of Police, who prepared the first information report, the Head Constable who registered the case and the Motor Vehicles Inspector who inspected the vehicle did not come, nor even responded to the summons issued by the Court. It has been repeatedly held by this Court as well as the Apex Court that unless or until coercive steps are taken for compelling the investigating machinery to substantiate the prosecution, Court of Law, at the realm of criminal juristic system, is deemed to commit serious error or mistake of law in disposing of the cases, as what was done exactly in this case by learned Judicial Magistrate while acquitting the accused. None of the case records show that learned Magistrate has taken any coercive steps against the official witnesses in this case, nor any reference was made in this regard in the impugned judgment that he had issued summons to such witnesses which were refused to be accepted nor returned. None of the case records show that learned Magistrate has taken any coercive steps against the official witnesses in this case, nor any reference was made in this regard in the impugned judgment that he had issued summons to such witnesses which were refused to be accepted nor returned. In the absence of any material in the impugned judgment or the case records, I have no hesitation to hold that the impugned judgment rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate is totally perverse in the eye of law and cannot at all be sustained. 6. For causing death of a school boy for no reason or motive in an accident, though law and order enforcing machinery was geared up with no laches or delay and the case was investigated, during the course of trial, if the procedure has not been implemented, it is incomprehensible to note as to how justice would be done or seems to be done if the courts of law or law and order machinery is not ready to discharge their bounden duty. Another disturbing feature in this case is that the investigating staff ought to have taken steps to see the conduction of the case in its proper, procedural perspective. But, it seems that they had no response at all to the Court of law after cognizance of the offence was taken by the court. If this is being the circumstance and position, I am put at every paid to note that the above conduct of learned Judicial Magistrate as well as the law and other enforcing machinery is so evasive and in disregard of the established legal norm and practice which goes to the root of the very fabric of criminal justice system. .7. When learned Government Advocate, Mr.A.N. Rajan was prompted with the above aspects, a direction was given to him to get the case diary and the concerned police officers. .7. When learned Government Advocate, Mr.A.N. Rajan was prompted with the above aspects, a direction was given to him to get the case diary and the concerned police officers. Accordingly, the present Station House Officer of Thakkalai Police Station with the concerned Head Constable were present in the Court, But however, it is rather perturbing to note that they claimed to have received no summons from the court, I am not inclined to believe the said version for the very reason that it is incumbent on the part of the police personnel to take notice of the stages of the criminal trial and to produce all the witnesses to maintain law and order and render justice. The investigating agency owes duty not only in the court, but also to the society in its entirety. Unless or until the above fact is put with conscious, no rule or law can be enforced or implemented in the present civilized world. However, learned Government Advocate assures for the production of the official witnesses, explaining their non appearance as one that happened due to communication gap. As I feel that redressal provided under the law has to be given for causing death to a innocent boy by a person due to his own negligence which may be in different forms, the trial court must be fair enough to do its duty in rendering justice by examining all the witnesses and materials as contemplated by the law and procedure. With the said view, I am inclined to set aside the impugned judgment by allowing this revision though the occurrence had taken place long back, I will remit back the whole matter to the file of learned Judicial Magistrate once again for fresh disposal after giving opportunity to both the sides to adduce legal evidence, in accordance with the law, which will alone, in my considered view, meet the ends of justice in this case. 8. For all the reasonings, above referred to, keeping in view the assurance given by learned Government Advocate on the specific instructions from the present Station House Officer as well as the police personnel who involved very much in the investigation of the case, I allow this revision, setting aside the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by learned Magistrate in C.C. No. 530 of 1987 dated 6. 1990. 1990. In this light of the directions given above, the whole matter is remitted back to the file of learned trial Magistrate for fresh trial to be commenced with immediately by issuing summons to all the witnesses. If they fail to attend the court, the trial Magistrate is directed to take coercive steps to get them and dispose of the case within a maximum period often weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. The investigating agency attached to Thuckalai police station is directed to produce materials and witnesses without any delay. The Registry is directed to send the case records and the order immediately to the judicial trial Magistrate without any delay under proper acknowledgment.