AHIR MALDE MARKHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Application has been preferred by the petitioner convict-prisoner against the impugned judgment and order dated 6.6.2001 passed in Criminal Appeal No.63/98 by the learned Sessions Judge, Junagadh, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner by confirming the judgment and order dated 30.9.1998 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mangrol in Criminal Case No.810/87 convicting the petitioner - original accused for the offence under sections 279 of the Motor Vehicles Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The petitioner has also been found guilty of offence under section 304 (A) of IPC and was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. However, the learned Judge has not awarded any separate sentence under sections 89, 116, 112 (3), 114 and 126 (I) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that the incident in question had taken place on 25.5.1987 at 17.30 hrs between Mangrol-Arena road. It is alleged that the present petitioner was driving Rickshaw carrier bearing No. GTW 5615 in a rash and negligent manner without licence and as a result of which a small child-Arif Hussain, aged 5 years was succumbed to injuries. A complaint in this regard was lodged before Mangrol police station being CR-I 94/87. On the basis of the complaint, offence as aforesaid was registered and investigation was carried out. During the investigation, panchnama of scene of offence was drawn, recorded the statements of witnesses and after receiving the medical certificate, post mortem report etc., charge sheet was filed for the aforesaid offences. The accused denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded not guilty of committing the crime and claimed to be tried.

(3.) To prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses as well as documentary evidences such as the complaint, Exh.12, Inquest panchnama Exh.25, panchnama of scene of offence, Exh.29, P.M. Report Exh.34, police report Exh.36, accident report form Exh.38 etc. After completion of the evidence, further statement of the petitioner-accused was recorded by the trial court wherein he denied the allegations made against him.