ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the judgment of conviction dated 08.03.2013 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Channarayapatna (henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) in C.C.No.265/2010 convicting him for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A of IPC and Section 134(a) and (b) of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (henceforth referred to as 'IMV Act' for short) and sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 134(a) and (b) of IMV Act. The petitioner has also challenged the judgment dated 04.06.2014 passed by the Fast Track Court, Channarayapatna (henceforth referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short) in Crl.A.No.56/2013 by which, the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court was upheld.

2. The parties shall henceforth be referred to as they were arraigned before the Trial Court. The petitioner herein was the accused.

3. The case of the prosecution was that the accused, a driver of a bus bearing registration No.KA-13-F-1379 belonging to the State Road Transport Corporation, was driving it on 07.01.2010 on Nuggehalli - Hirisave Road. At about 6.40 p.m., when he was driving near the land of Puttanarasimhegowda, he in a rash and negligent manner dashed against a pedestrian and the wheel of the bus ran over him, resulting in his instantaneous death. CW.3 informed the son of the deceased (CW.1), who lodged a complaint with the jurisdictional police. The police conducted an inquest on the deceased, drew a spot mahazar, seized the vehicle and subjected it to examination. The investigating officer recorded the statement of the witnesses, secured a report of the postmortem as well as a report of Motor Vehicle Inspector and filed a charge-sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A of IPC and Section 134(a) and (b) of the IMV Act. The Trial Court took cognizance of the offences and issued summons to the accused. The accused appeared and was released on bail. Copy of the charge-sheet was furnished to him. He pleaded not guilty when the substance of accusation under Sections 279, 304A of IPC and Section 134(a) and (b) of the IMV Act was read over to him.

4. The prosecution examined PW.1, son of the deceased, who lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional police. An eye-witness was examined as PW.2 who supported the prosecution and deposed that it was the accused, who was negligent and who dashed against the deceased, who was walking on the left side of the road. The spot mahazar was proved by PW.3 and PW.4. PW.5 was the Divisional Traffic Officer of the State Road Transport Corporation, who identified that the accused was the driver of the bus on the fateful day. PW.8 was another eye-witness, who supported the prosecution. PW.6 was the investigating officer, who investigated the case and filed a charge-sheet, while PW.7 was the Sub-Inspector, who registered FIR and submitted it to the Court. PW.9 was the Motor Vehicle Inspector, who deposed that the accident was not due to any mechanical defects or failure and that no blood stains were found on the bus. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., who denied the incriminating evidence against him and claimed to be tried.

The accused was examined as DW.1.

5. Based on the material placed by the prosecution, the Trial Court held that the accused was negligent and was responsible for the death due to such negligent driving and hence, it convicted him for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A of IPC and Section 134(a) and (b) of the IMV Act and sentenced him accordingly.

6. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the accused filed Crl.A.No.56/2013 before the Appellate Court, which was dismissed.

7