SANIKA MUNDRI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This revision application has been filed against the judgment dated 14.08.2014 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 42 of 2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has been pleased to uphold the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.04.2014 of the petitioner under Sections 279/337/338/304-A of Indian Penal Code passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in Bandgaon P.S. Case No. 14/2009 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 74/2009. The trial court has been pleased to convict the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for offence under Section 279 of IPC, three months rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 337 of IPC, six-month rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 338 of IPC and one-year rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 304-A of IPC. Arguments of the petitioner

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are two points involved in this case for consideration by this Court. Firstly, the prosecution has failed to prove that the petitioner was driving the tractor along with trailer rashly and negligently and accordingly the basic ingredients of Section 304- A of IPC is not made out against the petitioner. Secondly, it has come in evidence that the tractor and trailer was being driven by one Guddu and so far as the petitioner is concerned, his name is Sanika Mundri and accordingly, the petitioner has been wrongly tried and convicted by the learned trial court. He further submits that no witness has stated that the petitioner has alias name as Guddu.