Back
RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
Shambhoo Lal S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner impugns judgment dated 18.11.2002 of the appellate court whereby the appellate court has dismissed appeal of the revisionist (hereinafter referred to as ‘accused’) which relates to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.03.2000 passed by the trial court.
2. On 12.06.1994 at about 8:00 a.m. a jeep no. RRT 7312 being driven by the accused Shambhoo Lal hit a 7 years child, who was allegedly standing on roadside. The accident resulted into death of the child. The accused was charge sheeted and tried.
3. The trial court held that the accused drove the vehicle at a high speed as well as in a rash and negligent manner and it was on that account that the accident took place. The accused was convicted for offences under Section 279 and 304-A of the IPC and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment.
4. The accused challenged his conviction and sentence before the appellate court which confirmed conviction and sentence.
5. Both the trial court and the appellate court held the accused guilty after holding that the accused was driving the jeep at a high speed as well as rashly and negligently. Both the courts pressed into aid the doctrine of “res-ipsa-lo
The prosecution must prove charges of criminal negligence or rashness beyond reasonable doubt, and the principle of res ipsa loquitur cannot be invoked in the absence of conclusive evidence.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the degree of negligence and rashness to establish offences under the Indian Penal Code, emphasizing t....
Driving recklessly and losing control of a vehicle causing injury or death constitutes negligence, warranting conviction under Sections 279, 337, 338, and 304-A IPC.
: Answers given by accused when incriminating circumstances appearing in prosecution evidence are put to him and his statement under Section 342 of J&K Cr.P.C. is recorded, are required to be conside....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the inapplicability of the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur to criminal cases and the prosecution's burden to prove negligence and establish a direct ....
The principle of res ipsa loquitur cannot substitute for proof of negligence in criminal cases, and reliance on inadmissible evidence leads to wrongful conviction.
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
