ASGHAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. Mishra, J. This revision has been filed against the order dated 11-10-83 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur dismissing the appeal preferred against the order dated 28-4-83 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur convict ing the revisionist under Sections 304-A and 279, I. P. C. and sentencing him to un dergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and three months respectively.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the revisionist contended that the prosecution could not adduce satisfactory evidence to prove that the revisionist was driving the jeep which was involved in the accident. THE learned counsel further contended that the revisionist was not named in the first information report.

(3.) MAHAVIR supported the prosecu tion case regarding involvement of the ac cused. The learned counsel contended that MAHAVIR Singh was not cited as a wit ness in the F. I. R. The learned counsel referred to the contradiction between the evidence of MAHAVIR Singh and the in formant as to whether he had disclosed the name of the revisionist before lodging of the report or afterwards. The learned Additional Sessions Judge considered the contradiction and assigning valid reasons held that the alleged contradiction is inconsequential.