JUDGMENT:- The petitioner has impugned order of conviction and sentence; passed against him in Summary Case No.203/ 1987 convicting him of the offence punishable under sections 279 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer RI for one month and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- on each count, in default, to suffer RI for 15 days on each count. The sentences were to run concurrently.

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present proceeding are that on intervening night of 8th and 9th June, 1987, PW-1 Ankush was driving SRPF van bearing Registration' No.2379 on Aurangabad Nagar Road. He was going to Pune from Jalna, so as to bring newly recruited trainee officials. Bhimshankar (PW2), Mohammed Sayyad and Mohd. Abdullah, were travelling by this van. After crossing Kalewadi, the van came up to the bridge on Aurangabad road. From the opposite direction one truck was crossing the bridge. Therefore, Ankush stopped his vehicle near the bridge. While the vehicle was standing, ST Bus bearing Registration No.MWQ 6023 driven by the petitioner gave a dash to the said van from the back side. On account of the impact of the collision, the van went ahead and crashed the parapet wall of the bridge. The front portion of driver's seat and rear p0l1ion of the van was damaged. Front left side portion of the bus was also damaged. The passengers of SRPF van sustained injuries. On receipt of information regarding the incident, Pamer Police swung into action. Head Constable Bhimshankar Potdar (PW-2) and others were taken to Shirur Police Station. They were treated at Shirur Government Dispensary. As the incident had taken place within the jurisdiction of Pamer Police Station, a message was telephonically communicated to Pamer Police. As a result, Head Constable Bhausaheb Kasar and others, went to the scene of occurrence, conducted enquiries and found that Brijmohan Kisansingh (petitioner) was driving the ST Bus. Spot Panchanama (Exh.18) was prepared in the presence of witnesses. After enquiry, it was found that the incident took place on account of rash driving of the S.T. Bus by the petitioner.

Thus, Head Constable Sonkar lodged a report of the 'incident, on behalf of the State. On the basis' of this report offence punishable under Sections 279, 427 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, and the offence punishable u/s. 112 read with Section 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act, was registered. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

3. At the conclusion of trial, learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pamer convicted the petitioner of the offence punishable under sections 279 and 427 of the IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment as stated earlier.

4. Being aggrieved the petitioner preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.61/1992 in the Court of Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, Learned Sessions Judge, confirmed the order of conviction and sentence dismissing the appeal by his order dated 18-2-1998. These orders are impugned in the present Revision.

5. Shri. Gopal Navandar, h/for Shri. V. P. Latange, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the findings recorded by the lower Courts are perverse and. therefore, liable to be set aside. According to the learned counsel, there is no evidence on record to show that the vehicle was being driven negligently or rashly. It is further contended that inferences drawn by the trial Court are not based on evidence.

According to learned counsel, in view of these infirmities, the findings recorded by the lower Courts are perverse and deserve to be set aside.

6. Per contra, learned APP has taken the Court through the relevant portion of the evidence. Reference is made to the Panchanama of the scene of occurrence, to show the nature of impact. According to learned APP, if the evidence of witnesses and the conditions of the vehicle are taken into consideration, it can be seen that both the lower Courts were justified in recording the finding that petitioner was rash or negligent in dr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document