Accusation of negligence requires proof of rash and negligent driving; high speed alone does not establish guilt in criminal law.

ORDER :

S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.

1. Accused is before this Court in this criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.PC with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 10.11.2016 passed by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Channarayapatna, in CC.No.1457/2013, and the judgment and order dated 27.06.2017 passed in Crl.A.No.229/2016 by the Court of IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Hassan District, sitting at Channarayapatna.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent.

3. Petitioner herein was charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338, 304A of IPC in CC.No.1457/2013.

4. It is the case of the prosecution that on 16.02.2013 at about 1.30 p.m., when PW-2 was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-13-S-8947 on NH-48 from Channarayapatna towards Hassan, the lorry bearing registration No.KA-41-721 which was driven by the petitioner in a rash and negligent manner had dashed against the motor bike of PW-2 from its hind portion and had caused the road traffic accident in which PW-2 had sustained injuries and his wife - Lakshmamma who had sustained grievous injuries had succumbed to the same at the spot.

5. The petitioner who had appeared before the Trial Court in response to the summons received by him had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its charges against the petitioner, had in all examined nine charge-sheet witnesses as PW-1 to PW-9 and had got marked nine documents as Exs.P-1 to P-9. On behalf of the defence, no evidence was led nor was any document marked.

7. The Trial Court after recording the statement of the accused as provided under Section 313 Cr.PC, had thereafter, heard the arguments of both sides and vide the impugned judgment and order dated 10.11.2016 passed in CC.No.1457/2013, had convicted the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338, 304A of IPC. For the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC, petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month; for the offence punishable under Section 338 IPC, petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month; and for the offence punishable under Section 304A IPC, petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months.

8. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, petitioner had filed Cr.A.No.229/2016 before the Appellate Court, which was dismissed on 27.06.2017. It is under these circumstances, petitioner is before this Court.

9. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the petitioner. The courts below have failed to appreciate the aforesaid aspects of the matter. None of the charge-sheet witnesses have stated that petitioner was driving the offending vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The material on record would go to show that the accident in question had taken place on the left hand side of the road. The offending lorry was stopped immediately after the accident in question, which would go to show that the said vehicle was not driven in a high speed or in a rash and negligent manner. He submits that the accident in question had taken place on a Natio