MANJIALPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner was accused in C.C.No.1210/2009, in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Challakere, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Trial Court"), who, by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dtd. 25/1/2012 of the Trial Court, was convicted for the offences punishable under Ss. 279 , 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the IPC ") and Sec. 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the M.V. Act ") and was sentenced accordingly. Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.18/2012, in the Court of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Chitradurga, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "the Sessions Judge's Court"), which, after hearing both side, dismissed the appeal, confirming the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court. It is challenging the judgments passed by both the Trial Court as well the learned Sessions Judge's Court, the accused/revision petitioner has preferred the present revision petition.

(2.) The summary of the case of the prosecution in the Trial Court was that, on 14/11/2009, at about 11:45 a.m., the accused, being the driver of a Tanker Lorry bearing Registration No.JJ-6/TT-8342, drove the said Tanker Lorry from Challakere side towards Bellary on the public road, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against one Ms. Jyothi, D/o. M.R. Ananda, who was going by walk on the left side of the road, in front of the house of one Rama Setty near Sujimalleswaranagara on State Highway No.19, Challakere. As a result of the said road traffic accident, the said Ms.Jyothi sustained grievous injuries on her head, hands and other parts of her body and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. It is further the case of the prosecution that, after the accident, the accused ran away from the spot and thus has committed the offences punishable under Ss. 279 , 304A of the IPC and under Sec. 187 of the M.V. Act.

(3.) The accused appeared in the Trial Court and contested the matter through his counsel. The accused pleaded not guilty. As such, in order to prove the guilt against the accused, the prosecution got examined in all seven (07) witnesses from PW-1 to PW-7 and got marked documents from Exs.P-1 to P-9. However, neither any witness was examined nor any documents were got marked on behalf of the accused.