Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
V. M. DESHPANDE, J.
Hitendra, s/o Madhukar Ukey - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra and Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 489 Of 2012, 509 Of 2013
Decided on : 10-09-2015
Conviction - Motor Vehicle Act - Section 304 - II, Section 338, Section 427, Section 181, Section 184, Section 185 - The judgment discusses the appellant's challenge to his conviction under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Motor Vehicle Act. The court also addresses the order of confiscation and auctioning of the vehicle in question and the distribution of the sale proceeds amongst the heirs of the deceased. The court evaluates evidence related to the appellant's driving under the influence of intoxication, the inspection of the vehicle, and the injuries sustained by the victims. The court upholds the finding of guilt against the appellant and dismisses the appeals.
Fact of the Case:
The appeals arise from the judgment and order passed by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur convicting the appellants for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Motor Vehicle Act. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.509/2013 challenges the establishment of his driving the killer vehicle at the time of the incident resulting in the death of three persons and causing grievous hurt to three others. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.489/2012 challenges the order of confiscation and auctioning of the vehicle in question and the distribution of the sale proceeds amongst the heirs of the deceased.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds the appellant guilty of the offenses charged, upholds the order of confiscation and auctioning of the vehicle, and dismisses the appeals.
Issues: The issues include the establishment of the appellant's driving of the killer vehicle, the order of confiscation and auctioning of the vehicle, and the distribution of the sale proceeds amongst the heirs of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relies on evidence related to the appellant's driving under the influence of intoxication, the inspection of the vehicle, and the injuries sustained by the victims to uphold the finding of guilt against the appellant and dismiss the appeals.
Final Decision: The court dismisses Criminal Appeal Nos. 489/2012 and 509/2013.
V.M. DESHPANDE, J.
1. These two appeals can be disposed of by common judgment since they arise out of the judgment and order passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur dated 09.10.2012 in Sessions Trial No.257/2012.
2. Appellant - Deepak s/o Naresh Gedam in Criminal Appeal No.509/2013 is challenging his conviction for the offence punishable under Section 304 - II of the IPC and consequent sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. He is also questioning the correctness of his conviction for the offence punishable under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code and the sufferance by way of sentence for rigorous imprisonment for two years and payment of fine of Rs.1,000/, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. He is also convicted for an offence under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three moths and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven days. The appellant is also challenging his conviction for an offence punishable under Section 181 of the Motor Vehicle Act and sentence to suffer simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days. The appellant is also assailing his conviction for an offence punishable under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicle Act and sentence to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The appellant is also challenging his conviction for an offence punishable under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicle Act and sentence to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. The learned Judge directed that the substantive sentence shall run concurrently.
3. The appellant - Hitendra Ukey in Criminal Appeal no. 489/2012 is challenging the order of confiscation and auctioning of the vehicle in question and distribution of the sale proceeds amongst the heirs of the deceased.
4. The question, that is posed by the learned counsel for the appellant Hitendra in Criminal Appeal No.509/2013 before this Court is that though Deepak Gedam was apprehended on the spot itself after crushing three persons; Dilip Jankar, Sunilkumar Gajbhiye and Viju Jadhav to their death and the seriously injuring the victims Pramod Ukey, Ajay Thool and Rajat Sahu, it is not established by the prosecution that at the relevant time, it is only the appellant Deepak, who was driving the killer vehicle, Matadoor bearing registration No.MH31/ DS2472.
5. The appellant - Deepak Gedam was charged in Sessions Trial No.257/12 on 16.07.2012 that on 15.02.2012 at about 20.10 p.m. at Mekosabaugh bridge area, that he drove Matadoor No.MH31/ DS2472 under the influence of intoxication, which ultimately resulted into the death of three persons and causing grievous hurt to another three one.
6. The FIR (Exh.56) was lodged by G. N. Khandate (PW5) on 15.02.2012. He was on duty as Day Officer from 9.00 a.m. to 9.00 p.m. at Police Station, Jaripatka. At about 8.10 p.m. a phone call was received in the Police Station that an accident has taken place at Mekosabaugh over bridge. He, therefore, immediately rushed to the spot along with his staff. That time, he noticed one Mataroor bearing no. MH31/ DS2472 standing on the wrong side. He also noticed one motorbike of Hero Honda was crushed in and was around the tyre of the said Matadoor. They also noticed one moped lying near about 10 ft. away from the said Matadoor. He also noticed two other Activa vehicles at 15 ft. away from the backside of the Madatoor. During enquiry, it was revealed to him that the Matadoor driver came in breakneck speed and gave a dash to various vehicles resulting into death and injuries. It was also revealed to him that the injured were c
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
