KUMARA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By judgment dated 16-8-2007 in C.C. No. 133 of 2005 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gudibanda, the revision petitioner has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment. The conviction and sentence of the revision petitioner has been confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 2007 on the file of the Fast Track Court at Chickaballapura by judgment dated 29-4-2010. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by both the Courts below, this revision petition is preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

(2.) The petitioner was the accused before the Magistrate. The case of the prosecution is that on the intervening night between 8-5-2005 and 9-5-2005 at about 2.30 a.m., the accused being a driver of lorry bearing Reg. No. KA-02-D-2556, drove the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and thereby he lost control over his driving and as a result, lorry dashed against a road side tamarind tree and thereafter toppled. As a result of the accident, as many as six persons travelling in the lorry died on the spot, whereas four persons were injured. A complaint came to be lodged by one of the injured Narayanaswamy (P.W. 1) on the strength of which, a case came to be registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of IPC and upon investigation, the charge-sheet came to be filed, against the accused-the driver of the lorry for the aforesaid offences. The accused having denied the charges levelled against him, the prosecution in order to prove the charges examined as many as 29 witnesses as P.Ws. 1 to 29 and marked Exs. P. 1 to P. 23. After the closure of the prosecution side, the incriminating circumstances that cropped up during the course of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses have been put to the accused by way of his examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. so as to give him an opportunity to explain. The accused has not led defence evidence. Learned Magistrate having heard the Public Prosecutor and the defence Counsel and upon going through the entire evidence placed on record both oral and documentary, by judgment dated 16-8-2007 convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of IPC and sentenced him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of two months, one month, and one year respectively. Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 2007 filed by the accused challenging his conviction and sentence by the Magistrate came to be dismissed by judgment dated 29-4-2010 by the Presiding Officer of the Fast Track Court at Chickaballapura. Hence, the accused is before this Court.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner/accused and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.