NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 303 of 2016 Order Reserved on 07.01.2026 Order Pronounced on 16.01.2026 Ramkrishna @ Krishna Yadav S/o Shri Mahajan Yadav Aged About 34 Years R/o College Para Takhatpur, Bilaspur P.S. - Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur Digitally Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR versus Date:

2026.01.16

14:31:39 State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Balauda Bazar, District +0530 Balauda Bazar Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Anjiv Kumar Singh appears on behalf of Shri Bhupendra Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Smt. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer.

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL)

C A V Order

1. The present revision filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.03.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.23/2012 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatapara, Dist. Balodabazaar whereby judgment dated 13.07.2012 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Simga, Dist. Raipur in Criminal Case No. 652/2010 convicting the applicant under Section 304-A IPC (two counts) and sentencing him to undergo RI for one year-one year with fine of Rs.500/- on each count, in default to pay fine, to undergo further one month RI has been confirmed by the learned appellate Court, while directing the sentences to run separately.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.11.2010 at about 16:30 hours, the applicant/driver was driving the Pick-up vehicle bearing registration No.CG-10-C-3275 (for short, the offending vehicle) in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the Hero Honda Passion vehicle bearing registration No.CG-04-DC-385 and caused accident, owing to which, Mahesh Kumar Sahu and Dikeshwar Sahu, who rode the motorcycle, have died. On a report being lodged to the above extent by the one Manish Soni (P.W.2), F.I.R. under Section 304-A of IPC was lodged against the applicant under Crime No.415/2010 vide Ex.P.2. Offending vehicle of the applicant/accused and that of the motorcycle were seized vide Ex.P.1. Spot map was prepared vide Ex.P.3 and merg intimation was also lodged vide Ex.P.5, thereafter dead bodies of were sent to post-mortem vide Ex.P.12 & 13. P.W.6 Dr. G.S.Som, who conducted the post-mortem, opined that the death of deceased persons is accidental in nature. Mechanical report has been brought on record and marked as Ex.P.14.

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet under Section 304-A of IPC was filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Simga. The applicant/accused abjured his guilt and pleaded innocence while claiming trial.

4. Learned trial Court and that of appellate Court, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, convicted and sentenced the applicant/accused as mentioned in opening paragraph. Hence, this revision.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant/accused would submit that the finding of both the learned Courts convicting and sentencing the applicant, without proper appreciation of evidence, is erroneous. He would further submit that there was no cogent and clinching evidence to prove that the applicant was perpetrator of the crime in question while causing accident and the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. On these premises, he urged that the revision petition may be allowed. Alternatively, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that if this Court ultimately comes to the conclusion that the applicant/accused is found guilty, then considering the fact that the applicant/accused was in jail for a period of 8 days during trial and that, he is facing lis since 2010, therefore, he may be sentenced the period already undergone by him.

6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposes the revision and submits that owing to rashness and reckless driving of the applicant/accused, two persons, who were riding the motorcycle, have lost their lives, therefore, the trial Court and appellate Court were justified in