1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.125/2017

BETWEEN

BABU

S/O LATE MAHAMMED ALI

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

R/A 1^ST CROSS, SHANTHI NAGAR

UDAYAGIRI

MYSORE DISTRICT-570 019

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI T PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE BY KARNATAKA

BY BANNUR PS

T.NARASIPURA TALUK

MYSORE DISTRICT

REP. BY SPP,

HIGH COURT BUILDINGS

BANGALORE-560 001

&RESPONDENT

(BY SRI V.S.VINAYAKA, HCGP)

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C

PRAYING

TO

SET

ASIDE

THE

JUDGMENT,

C.C.NO.626/2008, DATED 17.09.2014 ON THE FILE OF

2

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT T.NARASIPURA PASSED IN

THE ABOVE CASE AND ALSO TO SET ASIDE THE

JUDGMENT

DATED

03.11.2016

PASSED

IN

CRL.A.NO.209/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. S.J.,

MYSURU AND CONSEQUENTLY TO ACQUIT THE PETR. FOR

THE OFFENCE ALLEGED AGAINST HIM.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON

FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Heard Sri T. Prakash, learned counsel for the Revision

Petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader and

perused the records.

2.

This Revision Petition is filed by the accused,

who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.626/2008 on

the file of the Civil Judge & JMFC, T.Narasipura by

Judgment dated 17.09.2014, whereby he has been

convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 279,

337, 338, 304(A) of IPC and 134 (a) & (b) read with

Section 187 of IMV Act, which was confirmed in Criminal

Appeal No.209/2014, on the file of the I Additional

Sessions Judge, Mysuru by judgment dated 03.11.2016.

3

3.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

Upon a complaint lodged by one Sri Prakash S/o.

G.Ramegowda, Bannur Police registered a case in Crime

No.42/2008 for the offences punishable under Sections

279, 337, 338, 304(A) of IPC and Section 134 (a) & (b)

read with Section 187 of IMV Act. In the complaint, it is

contended that on 31.03.2008 at about 12 noon, the

complainant harvested the vegetables grown in his

agricultural land and along with Marigowda, he had hired

Ape Luggage Auto Rickshaw for selling the vegetables in

Mysuru Market. When they were proceeding along with

vegetables load near Rangasamudra Gate of Bannur-

Mysuru Road, a lorry bearing No.KA.55 287 came from

Bannur side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed

against the Ape Auto Rickshaw from the hind side and

whereby the Auto Rickshaw turtled and the driver of the

Auto Rickshaw sustained injuries so also the complainant.

Marigowda also fell on the road and lorry ran over his head

4

and ultimately, succumbed to the injuries and sought for

taking action against the driver of the lorry.

4.

The

jurisdictional

police

after

thorough

investigation, laid a charge sheet against the accused for

the aforesaid offences.

5.

The presence of the accused was secured

before the learned Magistrate and plea was recorded.

Accused pleaded not guilty and as such, trial was held.

6.

In order to prove the case of the prosecution,

prosecution in all examined 17 witnesses as PWs.1 to 17

and relied on 23 documentary evidence which were

marked and exhibited as Exs.P1 to 23.

7.

On conclusion of the prosecution evidence,

accused statement as contemplated under Section 313

Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein accused denied all the

incriminatory circumstances found in the prosecution

evidence. However, accused did not choose to lead any

evidence nor place his version on record by adducing oral

5

evidence or filing a written submission as is contemplated

under Section 313(5) Cr.P.C.

8.

Thereafter,

learned

Magistrate

heard

the

parties in detail and after considering the oral and

documentary evidence on record, convicted the accused

for the aforesaid offences and sentenced as under:

"Acting under Sec.255(2) of Cr.P.C., the accused

is convicted for the offences punishable under

Sec.279, 337, 338 a