Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Bhag Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The present revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 12.10.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal No. 33/10 of 2015 vide which the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 18.05.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No.2, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. (learned Trial Court) in Criminal Case No. 3/2 of 2014/12 were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision petition are that the police presented a challan before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”). It was asserted that the informant Subhash Chander Chandel (PW-1) was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-23B-0279 on 09.08.2012. Pyare Lal (PW-2) was sitting as a pillion rider. They reached Awari at about 8.45 A.M., when a private bus bearing registration No. HP-69-2252 att
Revisional jurisdiction limited; cannot reappreciate evidence without perversity. Overtaking motorcycle on curve amid oncoming traffic is rash negligence under IPC Sections 279/337; probation inappli....
The court held that concurrent findings of two lower courts regarding negligence and causation in a motor vehicle accident are binding unless proven erroneous, reinforcing limitations on the scope of....
Negligent driving resulting in injuries constitutes a violation of IPC Sections 279, 337, and 338, warranting conviction and deterrent sentencing.
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....
Rash driving or riding on a public way – There is no such statutory exception pleaded in the present case. In absence of any material on record, no presumption of "rashness" or "negligence" could be ....
Conviction for traffic offences requires clear evidence of rashness, not merely high-speed driving; evidence of contributory negligence undermines charges under IPC.
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
