RAJIB NETRA PANIGRAHI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the 2nd. Addl. Sessions Judge, Berhampur, maintaining the order of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur, convicting the petitioner under Ss. 279 and 304-A, IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten days for the conviction under the latter offence, no separate sentence having been passed under the former conviction.

(2.) The facts of the case' most of which are undisputed, may be briefly stated thus. On 8-5-1983 at about 9 a.m. the ill-fated Jeep bearing No. ORG 8248 was being driven by the petitioner, who was the regular driver of the vehicle, an the occupants of the vehicle were the informant (P.W. 4) a Junior Engineer, working in Harabhangi Project who was proceeding to his village Patrapur with his family members consisting of his wife and three children. The vehicle was coming from Ichhapur side and proceeding towards Gopalpur. At the Pathara by-pass turning, while the petitioner turned the vehicle to the right, the vehicle dragged on to its extreme left and overturned by the side of the road after taking three somersaults. As a result of the incident the informant (P. W. 4), his wife (P.W. 5) and their two children, P.Ws. 6, and 7 aged respectively about 11 years and 12 years sustained minor injuries, while Pranay, their son of tender age sustained severe injuries on his person and succumbed to the injuries sometime after the incident. P. W. 4, lodged a plain paper FIR at Gopalpur Police Station as per Ext.4. P.W. 12, the S.I. of Police, Gopalpur Police Station registered a case against the petitioner and took up investigation. He examined the witnesses, sent the injured for medical examination and took steps for the examination of the spot and the vehicle by the M.V.X. On completion of investigation he submitted charge sheet against the petitioner u/Ss.279. 337 and 304-A, IPC.

(3.) The plea of the petitioner at the trial was that although he was the regular driver of the Jeep in question and was driving it at the material time, he was not driving it speedily or carelessly. It is also pleaded that the accident did not take place for any fault of the petitioner.