ORDER :

The revision petitioner/accused is before this Court assailing the impugned Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.09.2007 passed in Criminal Case No.32/2005 on the file of learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C., Navalgund (for short ‘the Trial Court’), convicting him for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304(A) of IPC and under Section 134 read with Section 187 of Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘the M.V.Act.’) and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months for the offence punishable under Section 304(A) of IPC and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 134 read with Section 187 of M.V. Act, which was confirmed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad (for short ‘the Appellate Court’) vide Judgment dated 31.01.2011 passed in Criminal Appeal No.141/2007.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the informant-Sri Parappa Shivappa Hireholi lodged the first information with Navalgund police on 04.01.2005 against the driver of the lorry bearing Registration No.KA-26/7425 stating that the accused being the driver of the lorry driven the same in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human life, from Navalgund towards Hubballi and dashed to Renuka-a minor girl aged 16 years, while she was crossing the road along with the informant and caused her death at the spot and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

3. On the basis of the first information, Navalgund Police registered Crime No.3/2005 and the investigation was undertaken. During the investigation, it is revealed that the revision petitioner was the driver of the offending vehicle at the time of accident. After investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed against the accused for the above said offences. The accused has appeared before the Trial Court and pleaded not guilty for the charges leveled against him.

4. The prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 7 and got marked Exs.P.1 to 7 in support of its contention. The accused has denied all the incriminating materials available on record in his statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., but has not chosen to lead any evidence in support of his defence. The Trial Court after taking into consideration all these materials came to the conclusion that the prosecution is successful in proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and proceeded to convict him as stated above. When the accused preferred appeal before the Appellate Court, the same came to be dismissed as devoid of merits, confirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Trial Court.

5. Being aggrieved by the impugned Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court, which was confirmed by the Appellate Court, the accused is before this Court seeking to set aside the same in the interest of justice.

6. Heard Sri Dayanand M.Bandi learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and Sri Ramesh B.Chigari learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the material including the Trial Court records.

7. It is the contention of the prosecution that the accused being the driver of the lorry bearing Registration No.KA-26/7425, driven the same in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human life, from Navalgund towards Hubballi on 04.01.2005 at 5.00 p.m. and dashed against the victim-Renuka and caused her death. Thereby he has committed the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304(A) of IPC and under Section 134 read with Section 187 of the M.V.Act. To prove this contention, the prosecution is relying on the evidence of P.W.1, who is the uncle of the deceased and who ha