THANGARAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 304-A and 279 IPC, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai, in C.C.No,331 of 2003 and he was sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 304-A IPC and no separate sentence was imposed under Section 279 IPC. THE said conviction was confirmed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode and sentence of imprisonment alone was reduced to six months rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner has preferred this criminal revision.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 17.07.2003 at about 5.45a.m., the deceased was driving his bi-cycle on the Chennimalai to Uthukuli road near Gandhi Nagar from west to east. At that time, the lorry bearing registration No.TN 33-E-2889, being driven by the accused, came in the opposite direction rashly and dashed against the cyclist. THE deceased fell down and sustained injuries on the right side head, right side shoulder and right side eye-brow. He was admitted in the hospital and surgery was also conducted. In spite of treatment, he died in the hospital on 27.08.2003. P.Ws.1,2 and 7 are the eye-witnesses to the occurrence. P.W.5 Doctor who had conducted the post mortem on the deceased found that the deceased had died due to head injury.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deceased was aged 55 at that time of occurrence and as the deceased fell down from the vehicle, the accident had occurred. Though the occurrence had taken place at 5.45a.m., complaint was given by P.W.1 only at 1.30p.m. THE learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the accused is aged only 36 and he has one son and he has to look after his family and the learned Judge has not questioned the accused before sentencing him to imprisonment and therefore learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for some leniency.