KISAN PANDURANG PACHANGE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant, has preferred the present revision application, under section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, dated 27/07/2000 in Criminal Appeal No. 44 of 1996, thereby dismissing the appeal of the present applicant, filed against the judgment and order, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Yavatmal in Summary Criminal case No. 350 of 1992.

(2.) THE applicant/accused, was charged for the offence punishable, under sections 279, 337, 308 and 304-A, of the Indian Penal Code, on the basis of charge-sheet instituted by P. S. O. , Yavatmal (Rural ). The prosecution story, in brief is that, on 27-4-1992 at about 8. 00 p. m. , the applicant/accused Kisan pandurang Pachange, was under influence of liquor and that when the bus was plying from Jodmoha to Yavatmal, he was driving the bus, in a rash and negligent manner, due to which, an accident occured, leading to the death of two persons. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Yavatmal, relying on the sole testimony of witness Devidas (P. W. 1), came to the conclusion that, the prosecution has proved the offence, under charge, against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The learned trial Court, therefore, by its judgment and order, dated 27-11-1996, convicted the applicant/accused, for the offence punishable under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal code and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, on each count and in default of payment of fine, he was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months, on each count.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and order, passed by the learned j. M. F. C. , Yavatmal, dated 27/11/1996, the appellant preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Yavatmal. The said appeal being criminal Appeal No. 44 of 1996, came to be dismissed, by the learned Sessions Judge, Yavatmal vide order dated 27/07/2000, relying again on the sole testimony of witness Devidas (P. W. 1 ).