LAWS(KER)-2012-8-443

K. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, MANGALAM AMSOM AND DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THENHIPALAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

Decided On August 03, 2012
K. Unnikrishnan, S/O. Narayanan, Mangalam Amsom And Desom, Tirurangadi Taluk, Malappuram District Appellant
V/S
State Of Kerala Represented By The Sub Inspector Of Police Thenhipalam, Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.146/1995 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Parappanangady. He was prosecuted by the Station House Officer, Thenhippalam Police Station in Crime No.68/1994 for offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304 - A IPC with an allegation that at 10.P.M., on 5/4/1994, the revision petitioner drove a stage carriage bus bearing Regn. No.KRD.763 with passengers, along Chelari - Ramanattukara National Highway in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and as a result, at Chelari the bus capsized. 11 passengers sustained simple and grievous hurt. Late Abdu, one of the passenger, who had sustained grievous hurt, while undergoing treatment at Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode succumbed to the injuries. After completing investigation, the charge sheet was laid before the trial court. The revision petitioner pleaded not guilty. Therefore, he was sent for trial. On the side of the prosecution, PWs 1 to 21 were examined. Exhibits P1 to P20 were marked. After closing the evidence for the prosecution, the revision petitioner was questioned under Section 313(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He advanced a plea that the road at the place of occurrence was down gradient with a curve. At the time of accident, there was some drizzling. When the revision petitioner applied the break, he lost control of the bus and thus the accident occurred. In effect his defence is that the accident is vis major (act of God). No defence evidence was let in.

(2.) THE learned Magistrate on appraisal of the evidence arrived at a finding of guilty, consequent to which the revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year under Section 304 -A IPC, simple imprisonment for six months under Section 338 IPC, simple imprisonment for three months under Section 279 IPC and a fine of Rs.250/ - under Section 337 IPC.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Perused the judgments of the courts below.