ORDER :

This petition is preferred by accused aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Additional J.M.F.C. Court, Mudhol in C.C. No.88/2009 dated 09.08.2010 convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C. sentencing to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 06 months and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C., in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of two months, which is confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.69/2010 by the Fast Track Court, Jamkhandi dated 14.07.2011.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred to as their ranks before the trial Court.

3. Brief facts leading to filing of this case are as under :

Sri Sanganabasappa S/o.Tammanappa Angadi, complainant filed a complaint before the Mahalingpur Police Station on 23.09.2008 at about 7.00 p.m., alleging that his grandson namely Prashant S/o. Mahalingappa Angadi, aged about 08 years, came in contact with live electricity in the guy wire, which supported the electric pole at Chinchali plot of Mahalingpur town. It is stated that when the minor boy was playing cricket he came in contact with live electricity in the guy wire and died due to electrocution.

4. Complainant received the information through his son-P.W.4 at 5.30. p.m. in the evening itself that the incident occurred due to negligence of the KPTCL officers. Hence, P.W.1 filed complaint before the P.S.I. Mahalingpur Police Station, thereafter charge sheet came to be filed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC. Accused appeared before the Court and obtained bail. He denied the accusation made against him and claimed to be tried, accordingly was tried.

5. In order to prove the guilt of accused, prosecution examined as many as 08 witnesses as per P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Ex.Ps.1 to 12 and 12A and material objects M.O.1 to 6 were marked in support of the case of prosecution. Thereafter, statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein accused denied all the incriminating evidence against him. However, accused did not lead any evidence by himself. After considering the entire material evidence, both oral and documentary, trial Court came to a conclusion that prosecution clearly established the negligence on the part of accused who failed in his duty to look after and maintain the electric lines which has led to the death of young boy-Prashant aged 08 years and accordingly convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months and pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default to pay fine amount, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of 02 months.

6. Aggrieved by the said Judgment of conviction, accused preferred an appeal before the Fast Track Court, Jamkhandi in Criminal Appeal No.69/2010. On consideration of the entire material evidence both oral and documentary and after re-appreciating the evidence and other materials on record, the appellate court came to a conclusion that there was no discrepancy or illegality in the conviction order passed by trial Court and dismissed the appeal and confirmed the Judgment of conviction passed by trial Court.

7. Aggrieved by the said Judgments of both the Courts, accused is before this Court challenging the correctness, legality and propriety of the impugned judgments.

8. Heard Sri K.L.Patil, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri.Ramesh B.Chigari learned HCGP for respondent-State.

9. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner/accused that judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Addl. JMFC, Mudhol, is contrary to material evidence on record and is not based on true state of affairs. Hence, the same is erroneous in law and required to be reversed. It is further contended by learned counsel for petitioner/ accused that, for the Court to hold accused to be