This criminal revisional application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of CrPC is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.08.2009 passed by learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in case No. Criminal Appeal 54(3) of 2006, whereunder the learned Sessions Judge upheld the judgment and order of conviction of the accused-petitioner under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Agartala, West Tripura in case No.G.R.891 of 2005 but set aside separate sentence under Section 279 of IPC and sentenced the accused-petitioner to suffer R.I. for six months for commission of offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC and further directed him to pay as compensation of Rs.50,000/to the complainant. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First class, while found the accused-petitioner guilty of committing offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC had sentenced him to suffer R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/, in default of payment of fine, to suffer sentence of another six months under Section 304A of IPC and also sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for six months under Section 279 of IPC. On appeal, learned Sessions Judge by impugned judgment dated 03.08.2009 modified the sentence and further directed the convictpetitioner to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/to the informant, i.e. the husband of the deceasedvictim of motor accident.

2. Heard learned counsel, Mr. Somik Deb for the petitioner and learned Addl. P.P., Mr. R.C. Debnath for the State respondent.

3. Prosecution case is that on 15.10.2005 at about 8.00 PM the informant(PW1), Uttam Rudra Pal and his wife, Smt. Sandhya Rudra Pal were engaged in loading and unloading of Laxmi idols and at that time the accused-petitioner, Niladri Das alias Sunni, riding a motor bike bearing No.TR01E4686, being driven most rashly and negligently with abnormal high speed, dashed Smt. Sandhya Rudra Pal from her backside, and as a result Sandhya Rudra Pal was thrown to the roadside near a lamppost and she received severe injury on her head and other parts of the body. Immediately after the accident she was taken to G.B. Hospital and was under treatment in the hospital till she succumbed to the injuries on 19.10.2005. Uttam Rudra Pal, the husband of the victim Sandhya Rudra Pal lodged the FIR on 19.10.2005 and accordingly West Agartala P.S. Case No.159 of 2005 under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC was registered and investigation was entrusted to S.I. K.C. Uchai(PW8), who after investigation submitted charge sheet against the accused for commission of offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC and on the basis of that charge sheet cognizance was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and on transfer of the case to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, the accused was examined under Section 251 of CrPC on 19.05.2006 narrating the substance of allegation to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. In course of trial, prosecution examined eight witnesses and after closure of the prosecution evidence accused was examined under Section 313 of CrPC and in his turn the accused declined to adduce any defence evidence. Defence case is that of a bare denial of the prosecution case. While crossexamination of PW1, i.e. the informant, defence has suggested that a false FIR was lodged implicating the accused-petitioner only to justify the motor accident claim case instituted by the informant since the motor bike belonged to the accused-petitioner was having with all documents and that another vehicle committed the accident and that the motor bike belonged to the petitioner was not involved in the accident.

5. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at the conclusion of trial found the accused-petitioner guilty of committing offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC and sentenced him as stated hereinbefore.

On appeal preferred before the learned Sessions Judge b