STATE Vs. RAMAKANT YESHWANT NAGVENCAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition filed on behalf of the State under Section 439 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The prayer of the State is that the sentence of fine of Rs. 5/- imposed by the learned Magistrate, Mapuca, under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code read with Ss. 89 and 113 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 is inadequate and, therefore, it should be enhanced. A notice was issued to the accused to show cause why the sentence should not be enhanced. This notice was under Section 439(2) of the Code.

(2.) The charge against the accused was that on 2nd March 1966 at 5.30 p.m., while returning from Mapuca he drove taxi No. GDT-679 at a 'tremendous speed' and thereby dashed against a bullock belonging to the complainant. The charge also was that the accused did not inform the Police about this accident. The accused pleaded guilty to the charge.

(3.) Sri Salvador Souza, learned counsel for the accused, states that there was a compromise between the complainant and the accused and hence the learned Magistrate took a lenient view. This statement is not borne out by the record. We are here concerned with the charge of rash and negligent driving so as to endanger human life. What is rash and negligent driving would depend upon the facts of each case. The decision in other cases are illustrative. There is a duty on every user of the road to exercise due care and caution while walking or driving. It is not necessary for the purposes of Section 279 that the rash or negligent driving should result in an injury to life of any person or property. It is also not necessary for the prosecution to prove that at the time of the accident there was any person on the road. What is necessary for the prosecution to establish under that this section is that the vehicle or car was driven on a public road in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life. The taxi of the accused dashed against the bullock and injured it. The accused was driving at a time when the pedestrian traffic was likely to be crowded. This section applies to the facts of the case.