RAGHAVAN PILLAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused is the appellant. He was tried by the learned Sessions Judge of Quilon in Sessions case No, 42/1950. The charges against him were under Sections 277, 304, 337 and 338, Travancore Penal Code. He was driving motor lorry bearing Index No. M. S. T. R. 6512. The prosecution case is that on 13-10-1124 he was driving the lorry from Kallada to Quilon. The lorry was loaded with several bags of paddy. When he reached the Shencottah Quilon Road, as a result of his rash and negligent driving the lorry overturned with the result that one of the persons in the lorry was killed and three others sustained injuries. On hearing the evidence placed before him, the learned Judge held that a case was made out against the accused under the provisions of the Travancore Penal Code and therefore convicted him. The findings recorded in para 21 of the judgment are as follows : On 31-10-1124 the accused was rashly and negligently driving the lorry along the public highway in such a manner as to endanger human safety or cause hurt. As a result, the lorry overturned and a passenger by name Ayyappan was seriously injured and died as a result of the injuries and P. Ws. 1, 4 and 5 also sustained injuries. The injuries sustained by P. Ws. 1, 4 and 5 were held to be grievous hurt. The accused has committed offences punishable under Sections 277, 304, 337 and 338, Travancore Penal Code. After a careful consideration of the evidence the learned Sessions Judge sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months. On that conviction and sentence this appeal has been brought in this Court,

(2.) THE accident is alleged to have taken place on the Shencottah-Quilon Road. The scene of occurrence was straight road running by the side of the railway line. At the time of the accident, the Trivandrum Express was running along the railway line towards Quilon. The evidence is that the driver Interested in the speed of the train and he drove in a rash and negligent manner. There were three bullock carts on the road coming from the opposite direction and they were keeping to their side of the road. Two carts in front passed without any danger. The third cart is alleged to have been loaded with long iron rods part of which protruded in front of the cart and to have suddenly turned to its right. Accordingly to the accused the lorry had to be suddenly swerved towards the right to allow the cart to pass and then to the left. In the process the lorry was overturned resulting in the disastrous consequences already adverted to.

(3.) MR. Govindan Nair, the learned Counsel for the accused appellant has tried to show that this is a case of unavoidable accident. On the other hand, the case for the prosecution stressed by Mr. Balakrishna Iyer is that there was rash and negligent driving on the part of the accused. The evidence indicates that he was driving at a high speed and without observing the rules which resulted in this accident. There is the evidence of the Traffic Inspector examined as P. W. 3. He has certified that the brakes were in good condition and there was no defect with the mechanism of the lorry. On his arrival at the place of occurrence he inspected the road at the place where the accident took place and from the. marks left on the road he found that the lorry was being driven along the centre of the road. The middle portion of the road was appropriated by the lorry.