AMEER AHAMED Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition coming on for admission, is considered for final disposal, having regard to the unusual circumstances under which the present petitioner has been found guilty and convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304 -A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC', for brevity).

(2.) THE allegations against the petitioner are that, on 14.01.2009 at about 10.40 a.m., the petitioner who was a conductor of a bus belonging to the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation bearing No. KA -50 F -13 had collided into the bus bearing No. KA -01 -F -1484 when there was no driver in the said bus. It is alleged that he drove the bus in a North -Southerly direction in reverse and he drove it at speed and in a rash and negligent manner and thereby had dashed into another bus bearing No. KA -01 F 1244 and which was said to have been parked, as a result of which a pedestrian was caught between the two buses and was injured and succumbed to the injuries. This incident occurred in the Shivajinagar Bus Stand. Incidentally, the petitioner did not possess a driving licence to drive the bus. A complaint was filed on the same day against the accused, on the strength of which a case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No. 6/2009 for offences punishable under Sections 279, 304 -A of the IPC. After investigation, a charge -sheet was filed. Thereafter, the plea of the accused having been recorded for the offences punishable as aforesaid read with Section 3(1) and 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the MV Act', for brevity), the accused had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined nine witnesses PWs 1 to 9 and got marked seven documents Exhibits P -1 to P -7. The statement of the accused was recorded as required under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr.P.C. for brevity), whereby he had denied the allegations. Arguments having been heard, the Trial Court found the petitioner guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304 -A IPC as well as Section 3(1) read with Section 181 of the MV Act and sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - for the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC and also found him guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304 -A IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ -. He has also been held guilty for the offences punishable under Section 3(1) read with Section 181 of the MV Act and has been directed to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -. Being aggrieved, an appeal had been preferred and the Lower Appellate Court framed the following points for consideration:

(3.) INSOFAR as the above contentions are concerned, the learned Government Pleader however seeks to justify the judgments of the courts below.