(1.) Heard Shri Joydeep Chatterji, the learned counsel for the Applicant and Shri A.A. Jagatkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
(2.) By the present Revision, the Applicant is challenging the Judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar on 21st December, 2006, in Criminal Appeal No.51 of 2006. By the said, the learned lower appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed on behalf of the Applicant. Though for other offences the Applicant was acquitted, the learned lower appellate Court confirmed the conviction of the Applicant for the offence under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, however, reduced the quantum of sentence from one year to three months and to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, and in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. Though the quantum of sentence was reduced from one year to three months by the learned lower appellate Court, the State chose not to file the appeal against the said.
(3.) In short, the case of the prosecution was that on 3rd December, 2004 at about 6.00 p.m., the Applicant was driving his vehicle having registration No. MH-16/B-2894, a 407 Tempo and he was plying the said vehicle on Nagar-Dound road in most rash and negligent manner. According to the prosecution, when the said vehicle crossed Kinetic square, which is situated at the outskirts of Ahmednagar city, it gave dash to one boy, namely, Neeraj, whose age was seven years at the relevant time, resulting into his death on the spot itself. After completion of usual investigation, challan was presented in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, who framed charge against the Applicant. The Applicant abjured his guilt and claimed for his trial. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined only two witnesses, PW-1 Dnyaneshwar Bhalsing and PW-2 Sunil Jadhav, and also relied on various documents duly proved during the course of the trial.