SELVARAJ Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Crl.R.C. is filed against the judgment dated 22.8.2007 in Crl.A.No.61 of 2007 on the file of the 1st Additional Sessions Court, Salem District, confirming the conviction and sentence dated 3.4.2007 in C.C.99 of 2005 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate-1, Mettur, whereby the revision petitioner/accused was convicted for the offence under Section 279 IPC and sentenced to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment and he was also convicted for the offence under Section 338 PC and sentenced to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment and also convicted for the offence under Section 304-A (2 counts) IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year (2 counts) and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (2 counts), in default to undergo six months' simple imprisonment. THE sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE skeleton of the case of the prosecution is as follows: On 1.2.2005 at about 4 a.m., P.W.1 Sinrasu, P.W.2 Palanisamy, P.W.6 Samraj and P.W.11 Mani were proceeding from Mettur to Bhavani. When they were proceeding in the mud road, the revision petitioner/accused drove his vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-39-Q-7475 in a rash and negligent manner near the TANSI factory and dashed against the pedestrian who were waking on the extreme left end of the Road and caused grievous injuries to P.W.1 and caused the death of Pitchai Muthu and Pandian. Immediately, P.W.1 gave a complaint to P.W.14 Sub-Inspector of Police and registered the complaint at 6.45 a.m. in Cr.No.12 of 2005 for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A IPC. and prepared FIR Ex.P-7. P.W.13 Dr.Rajarajan examined P.W.1 and he issued Ex.P-6 wound certificate. P.W.15 Inspector of Police took up the case for investigation and went to the place of occurrence. He prepared Ex.P-2 observation mahazar in the presence of P.W.8 Venu and P.W.9 Thangavel and drew rough sketch Ex.P-10. He conducted inquest over the body of the deceased persons Pitchai Muthu and Pandian and Exs.P-8 and P-9 are the inquest reports respectively. He sent the dead bodies of the deceased persons for post-mortem. P.W.12 Dr.Selvakumar conducted autopsy and issued Exs.P-4 and P-5 post-mortem reports in respect of both the deceased, namely Pitchai Muthu and Pandian, respectively. THE investigating officer also gave a requisition to P.W.10 Anandkumar to inspect the vehicle involved in the accident and he inspected the vehicle and issued Ex.P-3 report. THE investigating officer examined the other witnesses and concluded his investigation and filed the charge sheet against the revision petitioner/accused for the offences under Sections 279, 338 and 304-A (2 counts) IPC.

(3.) LEARNED Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent-Police submitted that P.W.1 is the injured eye-witness and he has congently deposed about the nature of the accident, and his evidence is corroborated by Ex.P-2 observation mahazar and Ex.P-10 rough sketch, which clearly proves the place and time of occurrence. He further submitted that it is true that the other witnesses, namely P.W.6 Samraj and P.W.11 Mani turned hostile, but the injured eye-witness P.W.1's evidence is corroborating the complaint and hence there is no need to assail the conviction and sentence passed by both the Courts below and he prayed for dismissal of Crl.R.C.