STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. MOHAMMED SADIQ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused is acquitted of an offence punishable u/s. 333, IPC. The case of the prosecution discloses that on 15-6-1998 at 6. 45 p. m. the accused was driving the auto on the M. G. Road, jumped the signal line. P. W. 2 the duty Police Constable gave a vigil to accused to stop his auto. The accused instead drove the auto suddenly in a rash and negligent manner, tried to escape the consequence of law. P. W. 1-the police Inspector chased the auto of the accused. P. W. 2 got into auto of P. W. 8 and chased the auto of the accused. The auto of the accused is intercepted near Kamraj road by P. W. 1. The accused denied the commission of any traffic offence, further, furiously hit P. W. 2 on his chest as a result, the three ribs on the left side are fractured. The police and the people apprehended the accused, he was taken to the police station. P. W. 1 lodged complaint. P. W. 2 is sent to the hospital for treatment. The medical record discloses the fracture of three ribs on the left side.

(2.) THE evidence of P. Ws. 2 and 8 fully corroborate the prosecution version about interception of auto at Kamaraj Road - assault by the accused on P. W. 2, causing grievous injuries. P. W. 8 is an auto driver an independent witness and he corroborates the prosecution version. The medical evidence also corroborates the causation of grievous injuries and fractures. The assault took place on P. W. 2 when he was on duty.

(3.) THE counsel for the accused submitted that the auto number given in evidence by P. W. 2 is different from the one given in the complaint. There is a discrepancy with regard to the place where the auto was intercepted. Hence argued for acquittal.