SHIVA RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant, Shiva Ram, as a driver of a motor truck who has been convicted by a magistrate of Jhansi, under as, 1279 and 304-A, I. P. C. , and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment under each count. The sentences were ordered to run concurrentiy. The applicant appealed to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Jhansi, but Ms appeal was dismissed, and the findings arrived at and the convictions and the sentences awarded by the trying Magistrate were affirmed. The applicant now prays for interference by this Court in exercise of its revisionai powers.

(2.) IT has been contended by M. li, Agrawala, very vehemently, that the applicant is not guilty of any offence under Sections 279 and 304a, I. P. C. , and that the view of the Courts below that the applicant was driving the truck "rashly" and "negltgently" within the purview of Section 304-A, I. P, C. , thereby causing the death of one Pillai, who was sitting on the extreme left on the front seat of the truck, is perverse and contrary to law. The learned counsel contended that the Sessions Judge had failed to distinguish between criminal and civil negligence. Mr. Agrawala cited a number of authorties. He relied particularly on Tika Karn v. Rex, AIR 1s350 All 800 and Chaman L,al v. State, 1958 All LJ 689 : (AIR 1954 All 180) and State Government M. P. v. Bhawanesh Kumar, AIK 1958 Madh Pra 205 and Bharosi v. State, AIR 1957 Madh Pra 236.

(3.) IT has not been argued on behalf of the accused-applicant, either in this Court or to the Courts below, that the immediate cause of death of Filial was not the act of driving by the accused. It has, however, been contended that the applicant has not done any "grossly" rash or negligent act" and that the requirements of criminal negligence or rashness on the part of the accused were, therefore, wanting in this case. After considering the facts of this case, the law applicable to these facts, and the arguments advanced by Mr. Agrawala, I do not find it possible to accept the contentions advanced on behalf of the applicant. But, as there appears to be some difficulty in distinguishing betbeen civil and criminal wrongs in such cases, I propose to examine the facts and to state my reasons for Holding that all the requirements of Section 304-A, I. P. C. , are satisfied in this case. The facts of the case, as found by the courts below, are: Hira Lal (P. W. 7) had hired the truck driven by the applicant to get some wood from Bangawan to Jhansi. The truck left Jhansi on 29-6-1962 in the evening and reached Bangawan at about mid-night. Hira Lal (P. W. 7), who was in the truck, got the wood loaded immediately after the truck reached Bangawan. After this, instead of taking some rest and going to sleep at Bangawan, like a reasonable and normal individual, the applicant was so rash as to hurry back to Jhansi with the result that, at about 5 a. m. , on 30th June, 1962, while 'driving the vehicle, the applicant was suddenly overcome by sleep and dozed off. As a consequence of this dozing off, the applicant lost control over the truck which lurched to the left. The applicant then woke up with a start and swung the truck to the right. The truck turned suddenly ana violently to the right and collided against a "bheesham" tree alter having left the road and crossed the foot-path. As a result of this collision, of the truck with the tree, Pilla, mentioned above, was so seriously injured that he expired soon afterwards at a Hospital where he was taken, and Hira Lal (P. W. 7) was also Injured, although he survived.