BASAVARAJ MADIVALAPPA PAWAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused in CC No.472 of 2012 was charged for offences punishable under Sections 279, 338, 304A of the Indian Penal Code and offences punishable under Sec. 134 read with Sec. 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, is before this Court calling in question the judgment and sentence passed in C.C. No.472 of 2012 dated 15th May, 2015, where-under petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 279, Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of payment of said fine amount, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, and under Sec. 338, IPC, sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Further, accused has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Sec. 304A IPC, and for the offence under Sec. 134 read with Sec. 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, he has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00. Criminal Appeal filed in Cri.A. No.62 of 2015 came to be dismissed by judgment dated 02nd December, 2015, confirming the judgment of trial court.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Sri. B.N. Jamadar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri. Raja Raghavendra Naik, learned High Court Government Pleader, who has been directed to take notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Perused the judgments passed by the Courts below. I find that there is no error committed by either of the Courts calling for exercise of revisional jurisdiction by this Court, for the following reasons.

(3.) The gist of prosecution case is that on 27th April, 2012 at about 11.00 a.m., on Kotur road within the jurisdiction of Garag Police Station, accused being the driver of Tata Ace bearing registration No. KA-25/D-1024 drove the same in rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human life and dashed his vehicle to a motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-25/EE-5380 causing grievous injuries to CW-6 and CW-7 and rider of the vehicle namely Sri. Gamappa died due to the injuries sustained in the said accident. Hence, charge-sheet came to be filed under Sections 279, 337, 338, 340A, Penal Code and Sec. 134 read with Sec. 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act. On behalf of prosecution, seven witnesses were examined and 15 documents came to be marked as Exs. P-1 to 15. However, no material objects were marked on behalf of prosecution. No witnesses were examined on behalf of accused in his defence. After appreciating the evidence lead by prosecution, trial court held that prosecution has proved the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt and as such, convicted the petitioner, as observed herein above.