KUMARESAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Crl.R.C. has been filed against the judgment dated 28.1.2009 in Crl.A.No.235 of 2008 on the file of the First Additional Sessions Court, Erode, confirming the conviction and sentenced passed by the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai, in C.C.No.282 of 2003, dated 5.8.2008, whereby the revision petitioner/accused was convicted for the offence under Section 304-A IPC (2 counts) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each and no separate sentence was passed for the offence under Section 279 IPC.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in nut-shell is as follows:

(3.) LEARNED Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent-Police submitted that it is true that the procedures contemplated under Section 294 Cr.P.C. have not been followed, but the death is instantaneous and on the spot itself, Saravanan died and on the way to hospital, Kumaresan died and so, the cause of death has been proved, and so, the decisions relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. LEARNED Government Advocate further submitted that there is no material contradiction in the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and in the motor accident cases, the minor contradictions will not in any way affect the findings of the trial Court. LEARNED Government Advocate further submitted that as per the decision of the Apex Court, in Section 304-A, IPC cases, no leniency could be shown to the motor cycle drivers while they were discharging their duty and causing much road accidents. He prayed for dismissal of the Crl.R.C.