The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in evidence justified acquittal in a criminal case.

ORDER :

(G. BASAVARAJA, J.)

Accused has preferred this Revision Petition against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed in C.C.No.118/2011 dated 27.10.2012 by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Kodagu Madikeri (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) which is confirmed by the Prl.Sessions Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri in Criminal Appeal No.66/2012 dated 27.03.2018 (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this revision petition are referred to as per their status and rank before the Trial Court.

3. The brief facts leading to this Revision Petition are that the Sub Inspector, Rural Circle, Madikeri submitted the charge sheet for the offence punishable under Sections 279 , 337 , 338 and 304A of INDIAN PENAL CODE . It is alleged that on 03.10.2011 at 7.00 p.m., near the gate of Government First Grade College at Napoklu Town, the accused was driving Eicher Mini Lorry bearing registration No.KA-12-A-1397 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-12-J-6257. As a result of the accident, Ajjettira Sanjay died and CW.12 P. Roshan Kariyappa sustained injury. Thus, the accused has committed offence under Sections 279 , 337 , 338 and 304A of INDIAN PENAL CODE .

4. After filing of the charge sheet, the case was registered against this accused in C.C.No.118/2011 and summons was issued to him. In pursuance of summons, accused appeared before the Trial Court and enlarged on bail. Charges framed and read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. To substantiate the case of prosecution, in all 8 witnesses were examined as PWs.1 to 8 and 8 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P8. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. He has totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses and has not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf. Having heard on both sides, the Trial Court has convicted the accused for the alleged offences and passed sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section s 279 and 304A of INDIAN PENAL CODE along with a fine of Rs.1,000/-. For the offence punishable under Sections 337 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , imposed a fine of Rs.250/- and similarly for the offence punishable under Section 338 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , imposed a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Being aggrieved by the same, accused preferred appeal before the Prl.Sessions Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri, in Crl.Appeal No.66/2018 which came to be dismissed on 27.03.2018. Being aggrieved by the judgments of conviction of both Courts, the revision petitioner/accused has preferred this present revision petition.

6. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court which is confirmed by the Appellate Court is arbitrary, capricious, illegal and not maintainable either in law or on the facts of the case and in all probabilities of the evidence on record. Both the Courts failed to note that the accident was only due to rash and negligent act of the deceased Sanjay. The deceased and the injured were under the influence of alcohol and thereby, hit the parked van and the damage to the vehicle which makes it very cle