STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. ALTAFSAB HASANASAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment dated 08.06.2016 passed by the Court of JMFC, Honnavar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Court below', for brevity), in C.C.No.207/2015, acquitting the present respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of the IPC.

(2.) In its memorandum of appeal, the appellant has taken a contention that, PW1 and PW2 are the eyewitnesses, who have specifically stated about the rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle by respondent/accused on the relevant date of accident. Nothing has been elicited in the cross-examination of these witnesses to disbelieve their true version. The accused has not denied the place, date and time of accident. The defence of the accused that the accident in question has occurred only due to the mistake of deceased himself is not acceptable. It is further contended in the memorandum of appeal that, the Court below has not noticed the fact that there are no break marks found in the spot as shown in Ex.P2 or Ex.P3, as such, the rider of the motorcycle had dashed the deceased without applying the break even when he approached the deceased.

(3.) In response to the notice, the respondent is being represented by his counsel. Lower Court records are called for and the same are placed before this Court. Even though this matter was listed for admission, with the consent from both sides, the matter was taken up for final disposal.