JUDGMENT

The appellant/accused in S.C.No.154 of 2013 was convicted by the learned I Additional District Sessions Judge, Vellore by judgment dated 28.03.2018 convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act and sentenced him to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment, for the offence under Section 304(ii) IPC [3 counts] and sentenced him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for each count and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for each count, in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment for each count, for the offence under Section 308 IPC [6 counts] and sentenced him to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment for each count and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- for each count, in default to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for each count, total fine imposed is Rs.29,000/- and the sentences shall run concurrently. Against which, the present appeal is filed.

2.In the Trial Court, P.W.1 to P.W.22 examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P23 marked. On the side of the defence, no witnesses examined and no documents marked.

3.The gist of the case is that the appellant/accused is a Driver of passenger bus of Sri Lakshmi Saraswathi Bus Service bearing registration No.TN-23-AK-4758 with 60 passengers on 14.01.2013 at about 10.45 p.m. left the Vellore bus stand, proceeded to Tirupattur. While proceeding on NK-46 at Anppondi Village, aerodrome junction road opposite to Krishna Agencies petrol bunk, the driver drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, knowing well that accident would occur and was also under the influence of alcohol, hit the heap of sand and blue metal stone on the roadside stored for road extension work, thereby capsized the vehicle and the vehicle turned turtle. In the said occurrence, three persons,namely, Kumar, Shabik Ahamed and Harikrishnan sustained grievous injuries, died and six passengers, namely, Kamatchi sustained fracture of pelvis bone, Amanullah, Sudhakar, Manikandan, Ramy, Chidambaram sustained simple injuries. On the complaint of one Sudhakar, FIR was registered by P.W.20/Sub-Inspector of Police, who visited the scene of occurrence, made arrangement for the injured to be taken to the hospital by Ambulance. Thereafter, P.W.22/Investigating Officer took up investigation, prepared observation mahazar and rough sketch, examined the witnesses present in the scene of occurrence, conducted inquest on the three dead persons, sent the body for postmortem and arrested the accused. Thereafter, P.W.22 sent the accused for medical examination which confirmed that the appellant consumed alcohol, obtained postmortem and medical certificate, altered the section and filed the charge sheet in this case. The Trial Court on the evidence of the witnesses and the documents produced convicted the appellant/accused as stated above.

4.The contention of the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant is that the accident occurred not due to any rash and negligent driving of the vehicle and none of the passengers including the injured persons stated that the appellant was in a drunken state and driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. Ex.P10/Motor Vehicle Inspector report issued by P.W.19 would confirm that left spring assembly main leaf has been cut, tie rod end damaged and due to the damage of main leaf, the vehicle would wobble and the driver would loose control of the vehicle. He further submitted that the injured witnesses, namely, P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.7, P.W.8, P.W.10 and P.W.11 stated that they have not spoken to the driver, they were sitting in the rear side of the vehicle and they could not be certain about the reason for the accident. Further, they all uniformly state that they were informed by the Police that the driver was drunk and they had no personal knowledge of the same. Further, it is seen from the observation mahazar/Ex.P2 and rough sketch/Ex.P18, that on the place of the