The prosecution must prove negligence and establish a direct nexus between the accused's actions and the alleged offense.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. This criminal revision petition is filed by the petitioner / accused under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ' Cr.P.C .') for setting aside the Judgment dtd. 1/9/2014 passed by the VII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belgaum, Chikkodi in Crl. A. No.139/2013 and Judgment passed in C.C. No.109/2012 on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Hukkeri dtd. 30/7/2013.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional State Public prosecutor.

3. The parties will be referred to as per their ranks in the trial Court.

4. The case of the prosecution is that on 3/2/2012 at about 12.30 p.m. near the land of Dundappa Nashipudi, on the Hattaragi-Hukkeri public road, the accused being the driver of KSRTC Bus bearing Registration No.KA-23/F-404, drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the bullock cart coming in front of the bus and caused the accident due to which the bullock cart fell down on the left side of the road and inmates of the bullock cart CW-1 and CW-6 sustained grievous injuries and Laxmavva sustained grievous injuries and died in the hospital. Thus the accused has committed the alleged offences.

5. After the filing charge-sheet, the Trial Court has taken cognizance against the accused for the alleged commission of offences and case was registered in C.C. NO.109/2012. Plea was recorded, accused pleaded not guilty and has claimed to be tried.

6. To substantiate the case of the prosecution, in all, ten witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.10 and nineteen documents are got marked as Exs.P1 to P19. One material - sample bottle are marked as M.O.1. On closure of prosecution side evidence, the statement under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused has denied the incriminating circumstances found against him and submitted written statement. But he has not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf. On hearing the arguments, the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Hukkeri has passed the Judgment by convicting the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 279, 337, 304A of IPC and sentenced the accused to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 for the offence under Sec. 279 of IPC, fine of Rs.500.00 for the offence under Sec. 337 of IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 for the offence under Sec. 304A of IPC.

7. Being aggrieved by this Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court, the accused/petitioner had preferred an appeal before the VII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belgaum at Chikkodi in Crl.A. No.139/2013. The appeal was partly allowed by confirming the order of conviction passed in C.C. No.109/2012 dtd. 30/7/2013 and sentence was modified by reducing the simple imprisonment from six months to three months and fine of Rs.5,000.00, in default to undergo two months' simple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Sec. 304A of IPC. As against this, the revision petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision Petition.

8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted his arguments that the impugned Judgments passed by both the Courts are not maintainable in law. The learned Magistrate has mechanically believed the testimony of the complainant and witnesses. The interested testimony of PW-1, PW-3 and PW-5 have not been corroborated by any independent witnesses. The accused has explained the cause for accident in his written statement under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. but same has not been appreciated by both the Courts. Further it is submitted that PW-1, PW-3 and PW-5 said to be the eye witnesses have admitted in their cross-examination that on seeing the Maruti car, the driver of the bullock cart all of a sudden changed the track of road without taking any precaution. But this aspect has not been considered by both the Courts. Both the Courts have failed to appreciate the evidence on record in proper persp