Order on Board

04/11/2024

1. None appears nor any representation made on behalf of the applicant to press this revision petition when the case is called out, but taking into account that the matter is old one, the Court proceeds to consider and decide the matter with the assistance of State counsel.

2. Mr. Bharat Gulbani, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State, is present.

3. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated

22.05.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirdham (Kawardha) (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No.36/2015, affirming the judgment dated 24.05.2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Kabirdham (Kawardha) (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.1559/2010, whereby the learned CJM, Kabirdham (Kawardha) has convicted the applicant for offences under Sections 279, 338, 304-A of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months under Section 279 of IPC, RI for 6 months under Section 338 of IPC, RI for 6 months under Section 304-A of IPC and RI for 3 months under Section

3/181 of M.V. Act.

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the date of incident i.e.

24.11.2010, complainant Ram Singh who is injured alongwith Shri Ram and deceased Sukduram were returning though their Bi-cycle from market at village- Kholwa to their village. On reaching the place of incident i.e. between Village- Bade Dhanora and Chhote Dhanora at public road, the applicant running the tractor rash and negligently dash all the three persons. Due to the occurrence of the said incident, Grand Son of Ram Singh, Ram Singh and deceased Sukduram received grievous injuries. Due to the said accident, Sukduram was admitted in hospital where Sukduram died on the same day at 10:00 pm. On receiving the information, the police registered the merg and on the basis of merg, F.I.R. was registered against the applicant at Police Station- Sahaspur Lohara.

5. After investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet Under Section

279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the IPC and 3/181 of the Act, 1988. The Prosecution has examined as many as Nine witnesses to prove its case and the applicant has examined Three Defence Witnesses. The learned trial Court vide judgment of Conviction and order of sentence dated 24.05.2014 and convicted the applicant for commission of offence which is punishable Under Section 279, 338 & 304-A of the IPC and 3/181 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and sentenced as aforementioned. While convicting the applicant the trial Court recorded the finding that there is a discrepancy in the date of incident narrated by the defence witnesses and the statement of P.W.1 Ram Singh and P.W.2 Shri Ram is un-rebutted.

6. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court, the applicant has preferred an appeal Under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the appellate Court, the appellate Court vide its judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.05.2015, dismissed the appeal preferred by the applicant and affirm the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court, hence this revision revision.

7. Learned State counsel submits that both the trial Court and the

appellate Court have rightly convicted and sentenced the applicant, in which no interference is called for.

8. I have perused the impugned order and other documents appended with criminal revision.

9. From perusal of the records, it transpires that the trial Court, after considering the material available on record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses, has convicted the applicant for offences under Sections 279, 338, 304-A of IPC and Section 3/181 of M.V. Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months under Section 279 of IPC, RI for 6 months under Section 338 of IPC, RI for 6 months under Section 304-A of IPC and RI for 3 months under Section 3/181 of M.V. Act. In an appeal preferred by the applicant the appellate Court has maintain