Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Dharam Pal – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of tempo accident due to negligent driving. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. accused contends evidence contradictions favor acquittal. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. revisional jurisdiction limited; no evidence reappreciation. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. witness pw6 proves negligent right-side parking. (Para 21) |
| 5. wrong-side parking breaches regulations causing injury. (Para 23) |
| 6. eyewitness pw1 corroborates negligent driving. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 7. pw2 inconsistencies rejected; brakes functional, negligence persists. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 8. site plan confirms extreme right-side driving. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 9. wrong-side driving constitutes rash negligence under section 279. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 10. grievous hurt proved under section 338 ipc. (Para 35) |
| 11. deterrent sentence mandatory for rash driving. (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 12. revision dismissed; convictions and sentence upheld. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 08.05.2015, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sen
Revisional jurisdiction limited: no reappreciation of evidence to upset concurrent conviction for rash driving (wrong side/parking too close on slope causing grievous hurt) absent perversity or juris....
Revisional court cannot reappreciate evidence to upset concurrent convictions under IPC Sections 279, 337, 338 absent perversity; driving on wrong side of narrow curve without precautions constitutes....
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.
Revisional court cannot reappraise evidence unless perverse; wrong-side driving at high speed is negligent causing hurt under IPC 279/337/338; probation denied in road injury cases for deterrence.
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....
Negligence in driving leading to injury constitutes a violation under Sections 279 and 337 IPC, affirming strict liability for road traffic offenses.
Revisional jurisdiction narrowly limited against concurrent convictions; negligence proved by high-speed wrong-side driving causing vehicle to hit pedestrians, parapet and overturn, absent mechanical....
Negligent driving resulting in injuries constitutes a violation of IPC Sections 279, 337, and 338, warranting conviction and deterrent sentencing.
Revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors or perversity, not reappreciating concurrent findings; high speed in crowded area causing loss of control despite sudden obstacle constitutes driver n....
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
