In a negligence case, the prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere occurrence of an accident does not suffice to infer negligence.

ORDER :

1. The Criminal Revision Case, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) is filed on behalf of the petitioners/A.1 and A.2 assailing the judgment dated 03.11.2009 passed in Crl.A.No.80 of 2009 on the file of the learned XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tenali (for short ‘1^st Appellate Court’) whereby the 1^st Appellate Court dismissed the appeal, by confirming the conviction and sentence imposed against the appellants/A.1 and A.2 for the offence punishable under Section 304A of INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) vide judgment dated 25.02.2009 passed in C.C.No.51 of 2007 on the file of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Repalle, (for short ‘the Trial Court’).

2. The parties to this Criminal Revision Case will hereinafter be referred to as described before the Trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that:

PW.1 lodged a complaint stating that on 08.04.2007, she and her husband (the deceased) boarded an APSRTC bus bearing No.AP10 Z 2803 at Bhattiprolu to travel to Pallekona village to visit their children. Upon reaching their destination, i.e., Uppuvagu bridge near Pallekona, the Conductor signalled the bus to stop. PW.1 alighted from the bus, and as the deceased was attempting to get down, the driver suddenly drove the vehicle forward without ensuring that he had fully disembarked. As a result, the deceased fell to the ground, and the bus ran over him, causing multiple injuries. He was immediately taken to the hospital, where he was declared dead. Following this complaint, PW.5 took up the investigation and filed a charge sheet.

4. The Trial Court took cognizance under Section 304A of the IPC against the accused. Upon the appearance of the accused, copies of the documents were furnished to them as contemplated under Section 207 Cr.P.C. The accused were examined under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C., with the substance of the accusation explained to them in Telugu for the offences under Section 304A of the IPC. They denied the accusation levelled against them and pleaded not guilty, claiming their innocence.

5. During the course of the trial, on behalf of the prosecution, PWs.1 to 5 were examined, and documents Exs.P1 to P8 were marked. After the closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., wherein the incriminating evidence deposed by the prosecution witnesses was explained to them in Telugu, after which the accused denied the allegations and stated that the incident did not occur due to their fault. The accused reported that they had no defence evidence to present.

6. The Trial Court, after hearing both sides and upon considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, found the accused guilty of the offence as mentioned above. Accordingly, by its judgment dated 25.02.2009 in C.C.No.51 of 2007, the Trial Court convicted the petitioners/A.1 and A.2 for the offence under Section 304A of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for three (03) months. Additionally, each was directed to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, and in default of payment, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one (01) month.

7. Felt aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the unsuccessful accused filed Criminal Appeal No.80 of 2009 before the 1^st Appellate Court, and the 1^st Appellate Court dismissed the Criminal Appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed against the accused. Felt a