A.S. Pachhapure, J.

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging his conviction and sentence for the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 of IPC on a trial held by the Magistrate, Chitradurga and confirmed in Crl. A.No. 46/2006 by the Sessions Court.

2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are as under :-

It is alleged that on 14.05.2005 at about 4.30 p.m. while the petitioner was driving the bus bearing No. KA-17/F-427 form Chitradurga to Chikkappanahalli, near Madanayakanahalli, the petitioner drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life, the bus hit the house of PW-1 situate on the right side of the road and having caused injuries to PWs 1 and 3, the owner of the house and a passenger in the bus.

After the accident, PW-1 approached PW-7, the PSI, Chitradurga Police Station and submitted the complaint Ex.P1, which came to be registered in Cr. No. 85/2005 for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 427, 337 and 338 of IPC and he sent the complaint and the FIR to the Magistrate and thereafter went to the spot and held mahazar Ex.P2 in presence of PW-4 and another. The vehicle was subjected to inspection by PW-6, the Motor Vehicles Inspector who issued the report Ex. P5, The statement of the witnesses were recorded and after securing the relevant documents i.e., Motor Vehicle Report, Injury Certificate, etc. The charge sheet came to be filed before the Magistrate.

During the trial, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 7 and in their evidence got marked the documents Exs. P1 to P6

The statement of the accused was recorded under Sec. 313 Cr. P.C. He contended that a boy abruptly came across the road while driving the bus and in an attempt to avoid the accident, the bus went and hit the house. On appreciation of the material on record, the Trial Court convicted the petitioner for the above said offences and aggrieved by the conviction, he preferred an Appeal to the Sessions Court in Crl.A. No. 46/2006, which came to be dismissed on merits vide judgment and order dated 26.10.2006 Aggrieved by the conviction and confirmation, the petitioner has approached this Court in Revision.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the Government Pleader.

4. The points that arise for consideration are :

i) Whether the judgment and order of conviction of the petitioner for the offence under Sections 279, 427, 337 and 338 of IPC as confirmed by the Appellate Court is illegal and perverse ?

ii) What order?

5. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that there was no rash or negligent act on the part of the petitioner and that to avoid the accident and injury to a boy who came across the road, the driver had to take the bus abruptly on the other side and in the course, the bus hit the house and the incident occurred. The Government Pleader submits that the petitioner was driving the vehicle in high speed which left the road and hit the house and therefore he submits that the material placed on record by prosecution is sufficient to convict the petitioner and the Courts below were justified in ordering conviction and the sentence.

6. As regards the manner of the accident, if we look into Ex.P2, the spot mahazar, the road at the spot runs from East to West and on the right side, at a distance of 10 feet there is the house of PW-1. It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of the accident, PW-2 was the conductor and PW-3 was the passenger in the bus and on the basis of the evidence of these two witnesses, the prosecution tries to prove the rash and negligent act. It is relevant to note that the evidence of PW-1 is of no help to the prosecution as he was inside the house when the bus hit the house. She states in her evidence that she does not know as to how the accident occurred. So the perusal of evidence of PW-1 does not reveal anything as regards the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the petitioner. So for as PW-2 is concern