Back
MILIND N. JADHAV
Shivaji Damodar Karne – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
1. Heard Ms. Deshmukh, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Mali, learned APP for State.
2. This Criminal Revision Application (for short “CRA”) takes exception to the twin judgments dated 28.02.2001 passed by the learned 28th Esplanade Court, Mumbai in CC No.40/P/98 and dated 18.06.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Criminal Appeal No.102 of 2001. Crime is registered under Section 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) against the Applicant. Applicant is a bus driver in the BEST. First Informant is a traffic police constable who lodged the complaint. Applicant is convicted and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment of three months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.
3. As per order dated 17.07.2019 passed by this Court, Legal Aid Committee appointed Advocate Ms. Chitrali Deshmukh to represent and espouse the cause of the Applicant.
4. Briefly stated, as per prosecution’s case, on 02.12.1997 at about 6:45 p.m. BEST bus on Route No.66 was on its way from Chira Bazaar to Crawford market. It was driven by Applicant. The bus took left turn at the junction of JSS Road at Shamaldas
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's actions were the direct cause of the accident, considering contributory negligence in criminal cases.
Evidence given by a witness in a previous judicial proceeding or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, when the witness is dead, is relevant for the purpose of proving the matter, provide....
Negligence and rashness must be proven beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under Sections 279 and 304A IPC; mere involvement in an accident does not equate to guilt.
Important Point :The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving the vehicle negligently, which was not established in this case.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that to prove the offense under Section 304A of IPC, the prosecution must demonstrate rash and negligent driving, and mere speed cannot be equat....
In criminal appeals, if evidence allows reasonable doubt regarding guilt, the court must favor the accused's innocence, especially in cases of alleged negligent driving leading to fatal outcomes.
Conviction for negligent driving requires substantial evidence beyond mere speed; a driver cannot be held liable under IPC without evidence proving rashness and negligence distinctly.
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
