HAMIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 04.04.1994 as passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No. 8/1994 whereby the learned Appellate Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the accused -petitioner and affirmed the judgment and order dated 11.10.1993 as passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Balesar in Criminal Case No. 909/1993 convicting the accused -petitioner for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 304A IPC and sentencing him to 3 months' simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 100/ - for the offence under Section 279 IPC; to 3 months' simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 100/ - for the offence under Section 337 IPC; and to 1 year's simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/ - for the offence under Section 304A IPC; and to further imprisonment in default of payment of fine for a period of one week each for the offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC and for a period of 1 month for the offence under Section 304A IPC.

(2.) THE accusations against the petitioner had essentially been that on 14.05.1989 at about 02:00 p.m., with rash or negligent driving of the bus bearing registration number RNN 9534 on Jodhpur -Shergarh road, he caused the accident by hitting the trolley of a tractor bearing registration number RJD 757 wherefor the trolley and bus suffered damage; and two passengers in the bus sustained injuries, one of whom died on the way to hospital. Upon submission of the charge -sheet after investigation, the petitioner was charged of the offences aforesaid.

(3.) ASSAILING the judgments and orders aforesaid, the learned Counsel for the accused -petitioner has strenuously contended that the accident occurred as a result of the collision of the rear outer wheel of the bus with the trolley of the tractor; and such an accident cannot be said to have been caused by the petitioner by any rash or negligent act. It has further been submitted that the statements of the witnesses do not substantiate the charge and on the contrary, the only deduction available from the material on record and the surrounding circumstances is of innocence of the petitioner; and the learned subordinate Courts have acted illegally and with irregularity in convicting and sentencing the accused -petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor has duly supported the orders impugned.