(1.) The petitioner was arrayed as an accused in C.C. No. 141 of 2002 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304 (A) of IPC. Upon completion of trial, the trial court convicted the petitioner for the offences under Sections 279 and 304 (A) [3 counts] of IPC. The petitioner was imposed with a fine of Rs.200/- and in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 279 IPC; and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- for each count, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for each count, under Section 304 (A) of IPC [3 counts]. The petitioner was not convicted for the offence under Section 337 IPC. The petitioner unsuccessfully assailed the judgment of conviction passed by the trial court by filing Crl.Appeal No. 4 of 2007 before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri as it was dismissed by the Appellate Court on 24.04.2009. As against the same, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner.
(2.) The facts leading to the registration of criminal prosecution against the petitioner is as follows:-
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would mainly contend that the accused is not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged occurrence. He would also contend that even as per the evidence, it is clearly stated that the accused ran away at that time. Therefore the evidence adduced by P.Ws.1 and 2 that the petitioner was the person, who was driving the vehicle at that point of time and hit the bullet going before it, does not correlate. He would also contend that the accident took place only because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bullet and at the time of the accident all the three deceased persons were intoxicated. Therefore, the conclusion arrived at by the courts below and the consequential imposition of punishment on the petitioner are liable to be set aside.