IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.473 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

V.N Prakash,

S/o. Late Narayana,

Aged about 52 years,

R/a Near Junior College,

Chickpet, Virajpet Town,

Kodagu District

Pin: 571105.

..Petitioner

(By Sri. Ajay Prabhu for Sri.Sachin B.S., Advocate)

AND:

State of Karnataka,

by Gonikoppal Police,

Represented by SPP

High Court of Karnataka,

High Court Building,

Bengaluru 3 560001.

.. Respondent

(By Smt. K.P. Yashodha, High Court Govt. Pleader)

****

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 401 read

with Section 397 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment and

order dated 02-02-2018 in Criminal Appeal No.5009/2017 on the

Crl.R.P.No.473/2018

2

file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri

Sitting

at

Virajpet

and

judgment

dated

23-02-2017

in

C.C.No.925/2010 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge and

J.M.F.C., Ponnampet, in the interest of justice and equity.

This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Admission,

through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing this day, the

Court made the following:

O R D E R

The present petitioner was accused in C.C.No.925/2010 in the

Court of the learned Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. Ponnampet,

(hereinafter for brevity referred to as <the Trial Court=), who, by its

judgment of conviction dated 23-02-2017 and order on sentence

dated 03-03-2017, was convicted for the offences punishable under

Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

(hereinafter for brevity referred to as <the IPC=) and Section 3(1)

read with Section 181, Section 156 read with Section 196 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the

<the M.V. Act=) and was sentenced accordingly.

Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred an appeal in

Criminal Appeal No.5009/2017 in the Court of the learned II

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri Sitting at

Virajpet (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the <the first

Crl.R.P.No.473/2018

3

appellate Court=), which after hearing both side, dismissed the

appeal, confirming the impugned judgment of conviction and order

on sentence passed by the Trial Court. It is challenging both the

judgments passed by both the Trial Court as well the first appellate

Court, the accused has preferred the present revision petition.

2. The respondent - State is being represented by the

learned High Court Government Pleader.

3. The Trial Court and the first appellate Court9s records were

called for and the same are placed before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is appearing through

video conference. Learned High Court Government Pleader for the

respondent - State is physically appearing in the Court.

5. Though this matter was listed for Admission, however, as

desired by the learned counsels from both side, the arguments on

the main matter itself were heard from both side. Perused the

materials placed before this Court including the Trial Court and first

appellate Court9s records.

Crl.R.P.No.473/2018

4

6. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be

henceforth referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.

7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, the only

point that arise for my consideration in this revision petition is:

Whether the concurrent finding recorded by the Trial

Court as well as the first appellate Court that, the accused

committed the alleged offences punishable under Sections

279, 337, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section

3(1) read with 181, Section 156 read with Section 196 of the

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, warrants any interference at the

hands of this Court?

8. The charge sheet allegation against the accused/petitioner

is that, on 23-10-2009, at about 7:10 p.m., withi