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

2020 Supreme(Tri) 57

S.G.CHATTOPADHYAY
Sentu Rudra Paul – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : A. Basak, Adv.
For the Respondents: R. Datta, P.P.

Judgement Key Points

What is the test for rash and negligent driving under IPC sections 279 and 304A? What is the role of high speed in establishing rash and negligent driving according to this judgment? What evidence is required to prove rash and negligent driving beyond a reasonable doubt?

Key Points: - The prosecution must provide reliable evidence to establish rash and negligent driving beyond a reasonable doubt. (!) - High speed alone does not constitute rash or negligent driving; the driving must be shown to be rash or negligent in manner endangering life, considering all attendant circumstances. (!) (!) (!) - The judgment acquitted the petitioner due to lack of reliable evidence and credibility concerns among witnesses, and criticized shallow investigation and omissions of material facts. (!) (!) (!) (!)

What is the test for rash and negligent driving under IPC sections 279 and 304A?

What is the role of high speed in establishing rash and negligent driving according to this judgment?

What evidence is required to prove rash and negligent driving beyond a reasonable doubt?


JUDGMENT :

S.G. Chattopadhyay, J.

1. This criminal revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 30.01.2017 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Unakoti Judicial District, Kamalpur in case number Criminal Appeal 14 of 2016 whereby he affirmed the judgment & order dated 28.05.2016 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamalpur in case number PRC 01 of 2015 convicting the petitioner for having committed offence punishable under sections 279 and 304A IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for 2 (two) years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- with default stipulation under section 304A IPC. No separate sentence was awarded for his conviction under section 279 IPC.

2. The prosecution story, briefly stated is that on 02.01.2015, the first informant (PW-1) lodged the written FIR with the Officer in Charge of Ambassa police station alleging, inter alia, that at about 1 O'clock in the afternoon when his brother Ranjit Das along with Raju Dhar was on their way home from Ambassa on their three wheeler goods' carrier, the speeding vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No. TR 04 2146 hit their three wheeler carrier from the opposite direction and as a result, said

              Click Here to Read the rest of this document
              1
              2
              3
              4
              5
              6
              7
              8
              9
              10
              11
              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 telegram-icon
              whatsapp-icon Back to top