Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M. NIRMAL KUMAR
Rajesh – Appellant
Versus
State rep. By The Inspector of Police – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioner was convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Katpadi (Trial Court) vide judgment, dated 05.03.2019 in C.C.No.41 of 2013 and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months for offence under Section 304(A) IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 279 IPC, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three weeks for offence under Section 279 IPC. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Vellore (Lower Appellate Court) in Crl.A.No.34 of 2019 and the same was dismissed vide judgment, dated 25.02.2022 confirming the conviction and sentence of the Trial Court.
Challenging the same, the present criminal revision case is filed.
2.Gist of the case is that the respondent Police registered an FIR (Ex.P3) in Crime No.118 of 2013 for offence under Sections 279 and 304(A) of IPC against the petitioner on the complaint given by PW1/defacto complainant, the brother of the deceased Saraswathi. The case is that on 24.01.2013 at about 06.45 p.m., near Rajalinga Nagar Bus
Conviction for causing death due to negligence was overturned due to unreliable eyewitness accounts and failure to properly admit key evidentiary documents.
Motor Accident - Causing death by negligence - Conviction confirmed - Power of a revisional court - It is well settled that a revisional court is not an appellate court and it cannot substitute its c....
A conviction under criminal law requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which was lacking in this case, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court upheld the conviction for reckless driving resulting in death, affirming that evidence from police officials can be credible without independent corroboration.
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 ....
The testimony of an interested witness can be relied upon if found trustworthy, and sentencing should be proportionate to the nature and gravity of the crime.
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
