VIDYADHARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner challenges the conviction and sentence against him under Sections 279 and 304 -A IPC. One Bhaskaran was knocked down on the Murukkumpuzha - Mangalapuram public road at about 8.45 p.m on 23.08.1995 by the autorickshaw No. KL -01 F 896 driven by the revision petitioner. Due to the fatal injuries sustained in the accident Bhaskaran died on the next day in the hospital. On the allegation that the said accident occurred due to the rashness and negligence on the part of the revision petitioner, a crime was registered against him in the Mangalapuram police station. After investigation, the police submitted final report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -II, Attingal.

(2.) THE revision petitioner pleaded not guilty during trial. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses, and also marked Exts. P1 to P11 documents and MO.1 series properties. When examined under Section 313 Cr.PC also the revision petitioner denied the incriminating circumstances. In defence he examined a doctor as DW1 and proved Ext. D1 to prove that he had also sustained some injuries in the alleged accident. On an appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution the trial court found him guilty under Sections 279 and 304 -A IPC. On conviction he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months under Section 279 IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for two years under Section 304 A IPC. As regards the defence evidence, the trial court found that it will not in any manner justify the accident.

(3.) ON hearing both sides and on a perusal of the case records including the evidence given by the material witnesses I find that the prosecution has well proved the case on facts. Practically there is no dispute regarding the death of Bhaskaran in a motor accident involving the autorickshaw driven by the revision petitioner. When the prosecution alleges that the alleged accident occurred to his rash and negligence, the case pleaded by him is that the unfortunate accident occurred, or Bhaskaran happened to be knocked down, when he carelessly crossed the road. Of the 13 witnesses examined by the prosecution the material witnesses are PW1 to PW3. Of them PW 3 turned hostile during trial. The crime was investigated by the Circle Inspector, Mangalapuram, who was examined as PW13. I do not find any irregularity or illegality or flaw in the investigation conducted by the Circle Inspector. In fact the evidence of officials in this case including that of the doctor who conducted postmortem examination is formal. On facts there is not much dispute, except regarding the cause of accident.