The prosecution must establish a clear link between the accused's negligence and the injuries sustained by the complainant, supported by credible evidence, to secure a conviction under IPC Sections 336 and 338.

JUDGMENT

1. Appellant/accused feeling aggrieved by judgment of first appellate Court on the file of IX Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in Crl.A.38/2015, dtd. 19/2/2016, dismissing the appeal and confirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Civil Judge and JMFC, Ramadurg in CC.No.297/2013, dtd. 27/2/2015 for the offences punishable under Ss. 336 and 338 of IPC, preferred this Revision Petition.

2. Parties to Revision Petition are referred with their ranks assigned before Trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The factual matrix leading to the case of prosecution can be stated in nutshell to the effect that on 9/2/2013 at 4.00 p.m. complainant took accused, who is KEB lineman to fix the electricity meter to his house, since he has obtained permission from the KEB authority, the accused fixed the meter to the said house. When complainant asked the accused to connect wire, who in turn being unable to climb poll on account of old age, asked the complainant to climb pole for connecting wire and he will inform KEB authorities to disconnect electricity supply and on such asking of accused, complainant climbed the pole to connect electricity, at that time, he was electrocuted and fell down from the pole. Thereafter, his brother brought him to district hospital, Belagavi on account of burn injury sustained on his both eyebrow, neck, left elbow, right wrist, etc. It is further alleged by prosecution that due to negligence of accused in asking the complainant to climb pole when there being no safety measures taken has resulted in complainant sustaining burn injuries due to electrocution. On these allegations, investigation was carried out and charge sheet came to be filed.

4. Accused was secured before the trial Court through process of law and substance of accusation was recorded, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution to prove accusation leveled against accused relied on the evidence of PWs.1 to 10 and documents at Ex.Ps.1 to 6. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and accused has not lead any defence evidence. The trial Court after having heard arguments of both sides and on appreciation of evidence on record has convicted the accused for the aforesaid offences and imposed sentence as per order of sentence.

5. Appellant-accused has challenged the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence before first appellate Court in Crl.A.No.38/2015. The first appellate Court by judgment dtd. 19/2/2010 has dismissed the appeal and confirmed judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

6. The appellant feeling aggrieved by concurrent finding of both courts below has preferred this Revision Petition contenting that both courts below have overlooked the material contradiction in FIR followed with evidence of informant and other witnesses and has proceeded to hold the accused guilty for offence alleged against him. The evidence of PW.8 doctor and wound certificate as per Ex.P.4 does not speak anything about complainant has sustained burn injuries due to electrocution. Evidence of material witnesses-PWs.1 to 5 are contrary to evidence of PW.8 and wound certificate Ex.P.4. In fact PWs. 2 to 5 are not eye witnesses to the incident, but they came to spot after the alleged incident. Hence, finding recorded by the trial Court in holding the accused guilty for the offences alleged against him are not based on any legal evidence on record. Therefore, prayed for allowing Revision Petition and to set aside judgments of both the courts below and consequently to acquit accused from accusation leveled against him.

7. Learned HCGP on notice, has appeared for respondent-State.

8. Heard the arguments of both sides.

9. On careful perusal of oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution, it would go to show that on 9/2/2013 at 4.00 p.m. accused was KEB lineman and he came to the house of complainant situated in his