D.RAGHAVENDRA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner/accused has preferred this Revision Petition against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 8/7/2015 passed in CC No. 164 of 2012 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Challakere (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as the "trial Court"), which is confirmed by the Special II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as the "Appellate Court") in Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2015 dtd. 27/6/2017.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal are referred to as per their status and rank before the trial Court.

(3.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on 22/12/2011 at about 6.30 pm, near field of Kakka Rangajja Thippeswamy of Adavichikkenahalli within the jurisdiction of Challakere Police Station, the driver of RTS bus bearing registration No. KA-16-9696 drove the same in a rash and high speed and while so proceeding, all of a sudden, applied the brake. As a result, the inmate of the bus Jayanna S/o Erappa who was standing near the door, fell down from the bus and sustained grievous head injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Challakere Government Hospital and thereafter to Government Hospital, Chitradurga; later, to SS Hospital at Davanagere. But the injured, not responding to the treatment, died on 31/12/2011 at 3.30 pm. It is stated in the complaint that after the accident, the accused fled from the spot without taking reasonable steps of securing medical assistance to the injured or taking him to the nearest hospital. Thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable under Ss. 279, 304A of the Indian Penal Code read with Sec. 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. After filing the charge sheet, the trial Court has taken cognizance and registered a case in CC No. 164 of 2012, summons was issued. In response to summons, accused appeared before the trial Court and enlarged on bail. The substance of accusation under Sec. 251 of Code of Criminal Procedure was read over and explained to the accused. The accused having understood the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.