STATE Vs. SRIDHAR POOJARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal passed in C.C.No.1236/2011 dtd. 25/9/2012 by III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga, wherein the respondent/accused was acquitted for the offences under Ss. 279 of and 304A of Indian Penal Code (for short hereinafter referred to as IPC ).

(2.) The brief case of the prosecution is that on 8/2/2011, the complainant along with his brother and cleaner of Canter 407 vehicle bearing No.KA-18-3701 in order to purchase the grocery items for his shop at N.R.Pura and were returning to N.R.Pura. When their vehicle reached near Ganidal bridge, a bus bearing No.KA-18-A-5048 driven by its driver/accused in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the Canter, due to which the Canter moved nearly 20 feet back and fell into the trench which was 20 feet depth. In the said accident, the complainant sustained simple injuries on his right knee and right thumb. The Cleaner - Shekar had sustained simple injuries whereas the driver of the Canter got tangled between staring wheel and the seat. The driver was immediately removed and shifted to Mc.Gann Hospital, Shivamogga, where he succumbed to the injuries at about 07:30 p.m. It is also stated that the inmates of the bus had also sustained injuries. Hence, PW.1/complainant lodged a complaint on the same day at Tunganagar Police Station, Shivamogga. The said complaint registered in Cr.No.52/2011 for the offences punishable under Ss. 279, 337, 304(A) of IPC. Thereafter investigation was conducted and charge sheet is filed against the respondent/accused for the offence stated above.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution in all examined five witnesses as PWs.1 to 5 and got marked eight documents as Exs.P1 to P8. The respondent/accused denied the evidence of prosecution in his statement recorded under Sec. 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short hereinafter referred to as ' Cr.P.C .'). No defense evidence is lead. After hearing the arguments, the Trial Court acquitted the accused. Aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the State has preferred this appeal.