KAMLESH TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused revisionist was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427, 304-A I.P.C. and was convicted under Sections 279 and 304-A I.P.C. vide judgment and order dated 12.08.2005, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Didihat. The convict was awarded three months' simple imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 279 I.P.C. The convict was also convicted under Section 304-A I.P.C. and was awarded rigorous imprisonment for six month alongwith a fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 304-A I.P.C. Accused was exonerated under Section 337 and Section 338 I.P.C. Aggrieved against his conviction, a Criminal Appeal was preferred before Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, who dismissed criminal appeal, vide judgment and order dated 3.3.2006. The conviction and sentence awarded to the accused was affirmed. Aggrieved against the impugned order, present criminal revision was preferred.

(2.) The prosecution story was that, on 20.11.2001, when informant Harish Chandra Bhatt was going with his father on 20.11.2001 at 08.00 a.m., a Jeep coming from Pithoragarh was stopped for the sake of boarding. The driver of the Jeep stopped his vehicle. The father of informant was about to sit in the jeep. In the meantime, a Tata Specio came from behind the jeep and crushed the father of the informant. Whereas the jeep was static, the driver of Tata Specio drove the vehicle rashly and negligently, hit Bhawani Dutt Bhatt (victim) and killed him.

(3.) P.W. 1 Ghanshyam Bhatt, P.W.2 Chanchal Singh, P.W. 3 Bal Kishan, P.W. 4 Sanjay Singh Bhandari, P.W. 5 Vipin Chandra Tiwari, P.W. 6 Kailash Chandra, P.W. 7 Harish Chandra Bhatt and P.W. 8 Constable Vinod Kumar were examined on behalf of the prosecution. When the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was taken, he denied the allegations and said that he was falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was given in defence.