IMPORTANT POINT
The court determined that the death was accidental, altering the conviction from murder under Section 302 to negligent driving under Section 304A.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. Assailing legality, validity and correctness of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14-6-2019 passed by the Sessions Judge, Janjgir-Champa in Sessions Trial No.78/2018, the appellant herein namely, Deepak (A-1) has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, by which he has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life & pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for six months, whereas, co-accused persons – Ghasiram (A-2), Ramkhilawan @ Guduwa (A-3) & Puniram Banjare (A-4) have been acquitted of the said charge.

2. Case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 29-7-2018 at about 8:45 a.m., at Village Kera, Main Road, Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa, the appellant herein while driving the Bolero vehicle bearing registration No.CG-12/AJ-1665 rashly and negligently, dashed the boundary wall of the house of Sanju Jangde (PW-1) and also dashed Shiva Banjare (since deceased) from backside by which he sustained grievous injuries and thereafter died during the course of treatment, and thereby committed the offence. The date of incident was 29-7-2018 and the place of incident was house of Sanju Jangde (PW-1) at Village Kera, Main Road, District Janjgir-Champa. Mahendra Kumar Dewangan (PW-4) being Sarpanch of Village Kera, immediately lodged FIR vide Ex.P-4 in which he has stated that the appellant while driving the Bolero vehicle rashly and negligently dashed the boundary wall of the house of Sanju Jangde (PW-1) and also caused injury to Shiva Banjare and accordingly, offences under Sections 279 & 337 of the IPC were registered against the appellant herein. The FIR was registered on 29-7-2018 at 9:50 a.m., whereas deceased Shiva Banjare died on 29-7-2018 at 10:55 a.m.. Merg intimation Ex.P-12 was recorded and inquest was conducted vide Ex.P-29. Dead body was subjected to postmortem which was conducted by Dr. P.S. Kurre (PW-14) vide Ex.P-25 in which cause of death was stated to be hypovolemic shock due to rupture of internal organs leading to cardio respiratory arrest and death was stated to be accidental in nature. However, immediately thereafter, on third day i.e. on 31-7-2018, wife of the deceased namely Pramila Bai was examined under Section 161 of the CrPC in which she has stated that murder of her husband has been caused pursuant to which offence under Section 302 of the IPC was registered and the investigating officer proceeded in that line and thereafter, Crime Details Form Ex.P-5 was prepared by Anand Kumar Sahu (PW-23) – Investigating Officer. Patwari prepared spot map vide Ex.P-13. Thereafter, investigation was conducted.

3. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC and after usual investigation, the appellant herein along with other three accused persons was charge-sheeted for offence under Section 302 read with Section 120B of the IPC and the case was committed to the Court of Session for hearing and disposal in accordance with law.

4. The prosecution, in order to prove the offence against the appellant herein and other accused persons, examined as many as 24 witnesses and brought on record 31 documents Exs.P-1 to P-31. The defence has not examined any witness, however, brought into record one document Ex.D-1 – statement of Smt. Photobai recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC. The accused persons were examined under Section 313 of the CrPC in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them, pleaded innocence and false implication in the crime in question.

5. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, while acquitting three co-accused persons, proceeded to convict the appellant herein for offence under Section 302 of the IPC, against which he has preferred this appeal.

6. Ms. Reena Singh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that the appella