Back
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Tulku Bahadur Lama @ Turku, S/O Lt. Zeta Lama – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
1. Heard Mr. NNB Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. KK Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. The present application is filed under Section 397/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing judgment and order dated 20.06.2011 passed by the learned Session Judge, Dhemaji, in Criminal Appeal No. 8(1)/2011 arising out of the judgment & order dated 25.01.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhemaji in GR case No. 317/2005 (DMJ) thereby convicting the petitioner under Section 279/304(A) IPC and sentencing him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three (3) months under Section 279 IPC and also sentencing him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year under Section 304(A) of IPC. The aforesaid sentences were to run concurrently.
3. Mr. NNB Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that both the learned courts below have committed error of law and both the decisions are perverse inasmuch as there is no iota of evidence to suggest either to the effect that the petitioner was driving the offending vehicle or that even if he is driving the vehicle, he was driving it in a rash and negligen
The conviction under Sections 279 and 304(A) IPC was overturned due to insufficient evidence of rash and negligent driving.
High speed alone does not prove rash and negligent driving; credible evidence is required to establish such behavior.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving in a 'rash and negligent' manner; mere high speed does not suffice to establish guilt under Sections 279 and 304A IPC.
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 304A IPC, emphasizing the sufficiency of eyewitness testimony and the standards for revising lower court decisions.
The court determined that mere speed does not prove negligence or rashness without evidential support, emphasizing the prosecution's burden to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Insufficient evidence and lack of investigation into the circumstances of the accident led to the acquittal of the accused of the charges of rash and negligent driving.
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
