STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. BABASAHEB Y CHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the State against the order of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karad in Criminal Case No. 1115/72. On 29th October, 1972 at about 9.45 p.m. Shri Yeshwantrao Mohite, a Minister of the Maharashtra State, was travelling along with some others in a car No. BML 9007 from Karad towards Kolhapur. He was followed by a police jeep which is being described as a pilot car. By the time his car reached near about mile stone Nos. 106/4 and 106/5, a truck bearing No. MYL 6100 was seen coming from the Kolhapur side towards Karad. Prosecution alleges that this truck was followed by another truck No. MHL 2707. It is the case of the prosecution that the pilot car which was following the car of the Minister gave light signal to truck MYL 6100 to slow down. Accordingly that truck slowed down and practically came to a halt. At about this time the Ministers car was crossing the stationary truck, when the truck No. MHL 2707 dashed against the rear portion of truck MYL 6100 and also against the right side portion of the Ministers car BML 9007. This accident caused damage to the two trucks and the car, and also caused simple hurts to some of the inmates of the Ministers car. Police Constable Dinkar Patil travelling on MHL 2707 got an injury to the finger which caused a fracture. The accused was the driver of this truck MHL 2707 which caused the accident. He was, therefore, prosecuted for rash and negligent driving and causing simple as well as grievous hurts to the various persons. A charge-sheet came to be filed against him for offences under sections 279, 337 and 338 I.P.C.

(2.) The defence of the accused was that he was travelling at a reasonable speed on a High-way in the correct direction and was following the truck MYL 6100. That truck stopped suddenly. Though he tried to check the speed of his truck he could not succeed as the truck in front stopped almost suddenly, without any prior intimation. Even this sudden stopping of the truck was due to the signal given by the police jeep, which was really unnecessary. The accident was caused not by the rash and negligent driving or rash and negligent act of the accused but by unforeseen circumstances and the wrong move taken by the police jeep in giving signal.

(3.) After hearing the evidence before him, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the accident is not the direct cause of the accuseds driving the truck but it has been caused by other circumstances, for which the accused was not at all responsible. He, therefore, acquitted the accused. Being aggrieved the State has filed this appeal.