Conviction for rash driving upheld; modified sentence reflects circumstances of the case.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA)

1. Heard Sri S.S. Mamadapur, learned counsel, for the revision petitioner and Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader, for the respondent-State.

2. Revision petitioner is the accused, who suffered an order of conviction under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of IPC in C.C. No.782/2015, confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.39/2021.

3. Accused was sentenced as under:

“Accused is sentenced to under go simple imprisonment for a period of 06 months for the offence punishable U/sec.279 of IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default he shall further under go simple imprisonment for 30 days.

Further accused is sentenced to under go simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months for the offence punishable U/sec.337 of IPC.

Further accused is sentenced to under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable U/sec.304(A) of IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default he shall further under go simple imprisonment for

03 months.”

4. Facts in brief, which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition, are as under:

4.1 In respect of a road traffic accident said to have occurred on 27.04.2017 involving the goods tum-tum Auto Rickshaw bearing No.KA-28/B-7102, a complaint came to be lodged with the Devar-Hipparagi Police Station. The accused being the driver of the said tum-tum Auto Rickshaw, drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and because of this rash and negligent manner Auto Rickshaw got toppled down and inmates of the said vehicle sustained injuries. One of the inmates, by name Dastgirsab Bagawan was shifted to the hospital, but despite best treatment he succumbed to injuries on

28.04.2015.

4.2 Police after registering the case, conducted thorough investigation and filed charge-sheet against the accused. Accused did not plead guilty, therefore, trial was held.

4.3 After due trial, accused was convicted for the aforesaid offences based on the testimony of the injured eyewitnesses, who were also inmates of the said vehicle at the time of incident. In the absence of any plausible explanation, placing the version of the accused, the trial Magistrate convicted the accused as aforesaid and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence under Section 304(A) of IPC.

4.4 Validity of the said judgment was called in question by the accused by filing a Criminal Appeal No.39/2021. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records heard the arguments of the parties in detail and by judgment dated 20.01.2023 dismissed the appeal of the accused and confirmed the order of conviction and sentence.

5. Being further aggrieved by the same, the accused is before this Court in this revision petition.

6. Learned counsel Sri S.S. Mamadapur for the revision petitioner vehemently contended that both the Courts have grossly erred in convicting the accused and sought for allowing the revision petition.

7. Alternatively Sri Mamadapur submitted that in the event of this Court upholding the order of conviction, he sought for modifying the sentence for the offence under Section 304A of IPC and sought to pass suitable orders.

8. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin supports the impugned judgment and sought for dismissal of revision in toto. 9. Having heard the arguments on both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.

10. On such perusal of the material on record, it is seen that