SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Kar) 775

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY, J.
Subramani S/o Muniyappa – Petitioner
Versus
State of Channarayapatna Police Station – Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 939 of 2011
Decided On : 19-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Alwyn Sebastian, Melanie Sebastian.
For the Respondent: V.M. Sheelvath.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code 1860 - Sections 279, 338 and 304A – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Accident - Grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others - Causing death by negligence – Convicted – Revision - Accused being driver of motor Car drove same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to a motorcycle which was coming from opposite direction and thus, caused the road traffic accident. In said road traffic accident, rider of motorcycle sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to injuries in spot and the pillion rider of motorcycle sustained grievous injuries and thereby has committed offences – Held, After accident, the accused, who was the driver of offending vehicle did not flee from place, but he still remained there and made himself available to the investigating agency to proceed further in matter. Further stated that, he also assisted in ensuring immediate medical treatment to injured in accident. Thirdly, it is also stated that, he was aged about 30 years as on date of accident and is sole breadwinner in his family. Further, there are no materials placed before Court, showing any antecedents of violation of any traffic rules earlier - Sentence of ordered for both offences punishable under Section 338 and 304A of IPC is on higher side, which can be called as excessive, considering facts and circumstances of case. As such, it is only for said limited extent of reducing quantum of sentence for proven guilt, to bring it to a reasonable punishment which is proportionate to proven guilt, the interference by this Court in the impugned judgments is required - Revision Petition is allowed in part.

ORDER :

1. The present petitioner was tried by the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and J.M.F.C. at Devanahalli (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the Trial Court”) in C.C. No. 87/2008 for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the IPC”) and was convicted for all the three alleged offences and was sentenced accordingly by its judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 29-08-2009.

Challenging the same, the accused preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No. 61/2009 before the Court of the Fast Track Judge, Devanahalli, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the Sessions Judge's Court”) which also, after hearing both side, by its judgment dated 22-09-2010, while confirming the conviction for all the three alleged offences as held by the Trial Court, set aside the order of sentence ordered for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the IPC observing that, since the accused (petitioner herein) was convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Sections 338 and 304A of the IPC, no separate sentence is required to be ordered for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the IPC. On the other hand, it confirmed the conviction of the accused for all the three offences and also the sentences ordered for the offences punishable under Sections 338 and 304A of the IPC. It is challenging the said judgments of conviction and order on sentence, the accused (petitioner) has preferred this revision petition.

2. The summary of the case of the prosecution in the Trial Court was that, on 26-10-2007, at about 2:30 p.m. on National Highway No. 207, between Devanahalli-Sulibele Road, near Channahalli Gate, the accused being the driver of motor Car bearing registration No. KA-08/M-126, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to a motorcycle which was coming from the opposite direction and thus, caused the road traffic accident. In the said road traffic accident, the rider of the motorcycle Sri. - Rajanna @ Muniraju sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries in the spot and the pillion rider of the motorcycle sustained grievous injuries and thereby has committed the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of the IPC.

3. Since the accused pleaded not guilty in the Trial Court, the prosecution, in order to prove the alleged guilt against the accused, examined seven witnesses from PW-1 to PW-7 and got marked documents from Exs.P-1 to P-7(a) and closed its side. On behalf of the accused, neither any witness was examined nor any documents were marked.

4. After hearing the arguments from both side, the Trial Court convicted the accused for all the three alleged offences, i.e. for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of the IPC. It sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the IPC.

Since the order on sentence passed against the accused for the proven guilt under Section 279 of the IPC has already been set aside by the learned Sessions Judge's Court, the quantum of sentence ordered for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the IPC does not remain to be considered.

5. The Trial Court sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months for the offence punishable under Section 338 of the IPC. It also ordered the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months, for the offence punishable under Section 304A of the IPC. It is this order on sentence for the proven guilt for the offences pu

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top