SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(HP) 246

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
R.L.KHURANA
RAJ KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 58 of 1994
Decided On : 12/10/1996

Advocates Appeared:
For the petitioner:Ashwani Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent:V. K. Verma, Assistant Advocate General.

Driving in a rash and negligent manner, causing an accident and resulting in the death of one person and injuries to another, is an offense under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and under section 181 (3) (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Headnote:

RASH AND NEGLIGENT DRIVING - SECTIONS 279, 304-A, INDIAN PENAL CODE - MOTOR VEHICLES ACT - INTERPRETATION - APPLICATION - CONVICTION UPHELD.

Fact of the Case:

The accused, driving a taxi, overtook a bus at high speed and caused an accident, resulting in the death of one person and injuries to another. The accused was charged with rash and negligent driving under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and under section 181 (3) (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the accused was driving in a rash and negligent manner, causing the accident and resulting in the death of one person and injuries to another. The court also found that the accused did not have a valid driving license.

Issues: Whether the accused's driving was rash and negligent, causing the accident and resulting in the death of one person and injuries to another.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused's driving was rash and negligent, as he was overtaking a bus at high speed without taking the necessary precautions. The court also held that the accused did not have a valid driving license, which is a violation of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused by the lower courts.

JUDGMENT

R. L, Khurana, J —The petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the accused, challenges the judgment dated 2-5-1994, of Sessions Judge, Mandi, in Criminal Appeal No 16 of 1993, thereby affirming the judgment dated 5-8-1993 of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class (1), Mandi ; in Criminal Case No. 92-11 of 1991. By this judgment the accused has been convicted for the offences under sections 279, 337 and 304-A, Indian Penal Code and under section 181 (3) (1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, and sentenced to simple imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs 1,000 for the offence under section 304-A, Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for a period of three months and fine of Rs. 500 for the offence under section 337, Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence for the offence under section 279, Indian Penal Code was awarded The accused was further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500 for the offence under the Motor Vehicles Act. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to runt concurrently.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are these. On 12-7-1991 at about 3.15 p. m, the accused was driving taxi No. HPY 1057 from Mandi to Rewalsar, in a rash and negligent manner, so as to endanger human life. At Talyar, on Mandi-Rewalsar road, he caused an accident resulting into the death of a child, Inder Singh, who was standing on the road side, alongwith one Pankaj. The said Pankaj also sustained the injuries in such accident>

3. On the basis of the report made to the police by the injured PW Pankaj, a case under sections 279, 337 and 304-A, Indian Penal Code, came to be registered with Police Station, Sadar, Mandi, vide F. I. R. No. 253 of 1991. After the necessary investigation and on a case having been found against the accused, he was arrested, challaned and sent up for trial for the offences under sections 279, 337, 304-A, Indian Penal Code and under section 181 (3) (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was also revealed, during the course of the investigation of the case, that the accused was not possessed of a valid driving licence.

4. The accused did not plead guilty to the notice of accusation served upon him under section 251, Code of Criminal Procedure He claimed to be tried. After the trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced by the learned Magistrate as aforesaid and the conviction and sentence imposed upon him also came to be confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge in appeal.

5. The accused has not denied the accident. He has denied that the accident had taken place on account of his rash and negligent driving. According to the accused, while he was in the process of overtaking a bus, which was moving ahead of him, at a high speed, the children all of a sudden tried to cross the road and he tried to save she children by, turning his vehicle towards the right side of the road and in such process the taxi, after dashing against a parapet, turned turtle and while so turning turtle, it happened to strike against the children. Though the accused preferred to lead evidence in defence, no such evidence was led.

6. While assailing the impugned judgment, the learned Counsel for the accused has urged that even if the prosecution case is accepted, the ingredients of neither section 279 nor section 304-At Indian Penal Code are made out. It is stated that if evidence of the alleged three eye-witnesses is held to be cogent and credible, at the most what can be concluded is that there was an accident and that the deceased, Inder Singh, died due to the injuries sustained by him in such accident. It has farther been contended that the evidence coming on the record is only to the effect that the taxi was being driven by the accused at a high speed. The mere fact that the taxi was being driven by the accused at a high speed will not render him liable for rash and negligent driving, within the meaning of section 279, Indian Penal Code.

7. On the contra, the learned Assistant Advocate General has supported the judgment of











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top