Cr1.A. 1217 of 2003 IN THE HIGH coum' OF KARNATAKA j CIRCUET BENCH AT I)i«IARWADQ__ f"~--.:. 1% DATED THIS THE 16"; my «§15.:;§;:<:V3ARY' *.',2[9fc'z9t BEFQRE THE HGIWBLE M12.Jus*m:j§;~1%v.JAGA;§réATI~iA§i"' 3 CRIMINAL BETWEEN: State ...Appeiiant (By Sri. Anéng fig - Jayaram "S}:ii1rap'paA ._ " ' « '" 30 yc~:a1s.Dri_ve:r, A " R] 0 Jizgna I)'S:)usa.vPa<.Sha n adi, Fathima E louse, " Bonda}, . . 'Ahéeingaléiia. ...Rcsponden1: Advocate, Aznicus Cum' 3) apmal is filed under Section 318(1) and (3) of iC§r.P.C. by the State PP. for the State praying to grant - " leave tofiie an ape-3} against the judgment dated 20.03.2003 '_ paséiéd 'by the £1 Addifionai Sessions Judgfi, Belgaum in "5'3rI.A .No.2/ 2009 acqtlifizing the respondent] accusesd for the oifence punishable under Sections 2739, 337, 304-A of EPC, "-and etc. This criminal appeal coming on far hearing this day, the Court delivered the following: Cr1.Ak1Q17 of 2003 JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the Statqaggriesieti G169?’
of the lower Appellate Court settzifig asidé’ thigh’ f
conviction passed by the tk1e”‘V’%’s¢s§:g:§n§j;?efi:.= ”
accused for the offences puni§suh:;§b1¢V TS§:ct:i9ns 279,
337, 304«A of we of lPCHaiA1d Section
137 of the MotorA.Vchic1¢s.A_ctV gfiassed themon.
2. Thé to the effect that
on was driving the Hem
HO11d¢:’v:iv~_.V€E4i.iC.#.vt3 ‘V ‘cbmplainant on the back seat
and W616 village: fiom Nipjpani, at about
33.121. , vsa:h’e;*1;:,_V ‘(fie S a”.”ldTVt3hiC§£’: came near Vedganga bridge,
“1a:€;ux4y..A«1bus*i5ea””n*ng N.KA-19/4358 driven by the
came from the opposite direction and
the Hero Htmda vehicle leading to the
de<§ea:;&;_i Shankar Khoth falling to his right side and the
AAV§$iI1i9I1V'rider falling to his left side and the bus back Whfiel
run over the Hero Ronda rider and killing him on the
3330:. The complaint lodged by '£116: pillion rfititr of the Hero
E'?
Cri.A.121′? of 2003
:3:
Honda vehicle i,€:., RW. 1«Da£:1aso Maruti C}1augul£~.1f¢&&’:
case being registered on the basis of thfi K V’
On the completion of inves1:ig2:§ti<}V3:b:""c:1'za;~ge:' .;;:;,'}%1I:C.'§V"'§t?a§.
submitted against the respondent*a§§c:u§;cfi1
3. Foflowing the: aCC1IS€€I;i”é[‘}.\}t_» éflfiw, the
prosecution led ‘(ha evfiiéficg ‘ifgy P,WsH.1″ to 12 and
marked documents Ex. P,. écnicd
the case of “wag, questioned under
Section and did not come in
dcfencrg _ after appreciating the
evidenéé én prosecution had brought home
the guilt of “$6 “beyond ail reasonabic doubt, and
V’ . Iffsjjéiident was convicted for the
é{£’é_ii:zi:1:é:z;.tii”x:§’3f14*:(:1″ :3fi’e11ces and he waa sentenced to undergo
éifixfjlc for two months for the ofibnce
puni$}:%”;ib1e’under Section 289 of EPC, one month simple
A »:J_ ‘ ifii§’fisonmcnt for the: ofiiencc punishable under Section 37
{PC and six months simple impsdsonmcnt for the Gifcnce
punishable under Section 36443 IPC and also one month
simple imprisonment for the oflencs punishable uzzder
EV.
r
C:*1.A,121′? of 2093
:4:
Section 134 read with Section 18′? of the Motor V.
The accused, aggieved by the arder of L”
scntence iaassed by the Trial court,”§iae:2ar;¢g1 an
learned Judge of the lower
appeal anti set aside the ‘V V
and acquitted the :csp9;1dent”‘of “-the oiiemsesfl charged
against tum’ . Aggrieveé VA jtgfiégafint of the lower
Appellate Couxjt, . t.«’;u;i93” appeal.
4. i for the parties; and
5. sgbm;s’s5§fi.'(o£:’L$m Anand Navalgimath, learned
for the State, is that the lowczr
.A did net appreciate the evificnce pmperly ané
account of the accident coupled with the
é.¢:${i11m§:i:ite::§::rodu
of
Cri.A.1217 of 2003
:5:
eonvicteé the respondent. 8111;, however, the
Court proceeded on the basis that speed of
not been mentioned and that the dzixiers the
in order to maintain their tivminga;;__v駖it}A”ha\¥e
vehicle at a garticular speed ass to .ir:ach,_the Vtiieaiiuation V
and on this reasoning taking the
evidence of one of the were some signs
of rain at the and (iriver of the bus
being be accepted and
in the. ‘ lappreciation, the learned
JudgeV1…ofC$urt recorded a finding that
the an ermr in appxeciating the
evirifexice and”;-A._t }t1eI*efv<:n1e, the accuaed was acquitted by
1' '€1PI3€31-
A 6.. Iti’j_t1.£e light of the evidence on accord, a submission
is, th.et’e«;_fote, made by the learned Government Advocate that
A f_” itIié:<-..above reasoning of the lower Appellate Court is against
't}1eHevidenee on recoxti, and therefore, justice would be met
V R "by Setting aside the judgment of the lower Appellate Ccurt
and Iestoring the order of the Trial Court.
%
Crl.A. 1217 of 2903
'7'. On the other hand, Shri Amarego1;§L%§;'l _
counsel far the mspondenbaccused supparttfiilv ..vieW –. u
taken by the lower Appttllate
actzidcnt happened near Ve(:la*G7_a1f1ga«t 'b_:fk1e a1}.§3."'Vétif': fl'l.<§ "
was a small bridge, the bus' alméfidy the
bridge and as such to have
Waited for the bus to 1:)eA1V.§:V:_5f'l' doing so and
trying to movgs Hfllilla lvaccident occurred
when the Ilafgxdle of the Hero Honda
vehiclé fictmt of the bus and as
such vehicle lost his balance
and' _f(:l1 d<j¥ie*n§V"Fh¢_rel'c_1u'é;'~*ilu1o fault can be found with the bus
thisllllfaetiaas been takefi note of by the lower
and as such the View taken by the lower
is the possible View and, therefore, no
intéfixfefeglée is called for against the acquittal of the accuseci
~ lower Appellate. Court. In support of the above
Alstlxllmission, the learned counsel also refened to the evidence
' of the prosecution witnesses.
%’
8, in the Eight sf ihe abevfi eontentions gut
ska gain: fay Caflsidfifafiflfl is§ Whfifizaz’ {he s:s3:’d€J_:?–‘~i:»f 1 ~
passed $3}; the iawer appellate Couxjg _ r.::a:::_5 ‘bf ‘
stistainable in law’?
9. The fact of the acciiiaf: havixig. at tbs
place ajlfiged in the cozfiipiainffifii ‘£152: §:fi~..:§ispu{é§ MVVPW-1 is
nrsrm: ether {ham the pflfiéfi {3;€; {$.15 ‘Ew§fzj::T{§_’.§§az1éa v6:h.ic1e
which was drivs;.n«.1}y’— th&§3d.e C¢{fi;,se€3V Witness W119 has
lodged his evidance that when
the He::’c§’.E§onéa- near Vedaganga hriflga, 3
Iuxuxy _ bu$ 5(‘:a1;t::: . égvfiosiic side at high speed aad
‘~ {€§:3.,ii¥:§if3f H€1′;€.V?’>H Hfifida which an acceunt £.’}f§¥§1i(‘?h PW~ 1
7..;!”c:*§.§ €:’:;V siiie, 3:32;? ‘aha decaaseé Shankar fa}; 0:: tbs:
regci éazid t}1<:['§1river sids whsel af flat: Euxury has rag ever
' Vtfiixaniéazx "V '
V' * Thifi Witness has aim gtatcé that thfi iuxugy bus
K straight in the middle pmfiion gr EEK: mad and hit me
». _' Iflam Eionda vehicle anti it is aiso in his ev1'{}.em:e ihat tharza
(E
NY
gariicuéar, the Spat. panchanafiza EXKPEE arid the
E:-x.P5(B}. A piaizz ice}: at the skate}; map mveafiis M
accidem accurztti towarés the €X§i'f3§:{i€'_}i€f$ . Siiiiék fi '{¥3£1§;./,§;%l€V\'».,
dizrrctian 9f the Herg Honda ve}1ic}a;"'w§i§i_§f:T};'xassés;
Nippani, Tim sketch 3130 {Edi
393:3: to the right aids af £116 'E136 fibéiééfit V e;v;§:,*c11rz'ec1
ab0ut_150' away' from _ Based on this
eviéence, the fI"i3:§._C011I't: _…££.3.(}:R the bus was
drivsa on :11? ieaciing £0 '#33::
acaiciaat. .:1;:s:jé°V%:i*r éiéfiefiate (3021:? did :10:
agpreciéiée A $}i}Q’£€_:r €\fi€1$’:§;lC¢,’ but Gniy ‘wok into accaunt
the Spfifiég’ Vihé has asbssrvéii iihaiz merstiy
bscausgcs *=:%_1€ v$¥1ir;£:€”%?asV'{i1&V€21 at a high Speed, that i’iSfi§f
533315: bi::””c*.<3i:2i;tf§1€d« as the Vfi'hiC1€ being drivezz in 3 re2s:h
'aaxfi .¢:;*;.eKg}ig?i.m£" mfe:33.:1arg
Sé%:ané1}*, the: Eowtzr apgaflata court gigs fmm-zi
""'V.f§'3;E1:E' rider of me Hem Honda, vehécls by ebscivixlg
"tixé dscaased himseif couiti have avaidefi the aCCfif3I1t
"E-'h:::: saié cwnciusion 91" 11136 E02123: apgaiiatc Ccmrt is 't0:afi§r
A V' " 'b<)z1fi~aI'§-I 'lie the a'is'i{iez3.:
\
3}
36′ Pm’ {ha afarementiezxsai 13330113, ‘£333 j’iV§i..’§Li§’«,;’_i’4V’:7;€”i3I’2:”£’,.{§§’7′ V.
the }0wm:’ appafiata cmirt cazmet has s13.s.!;a1’11ed” i1′: L” §§§?_ ‘ ‘
that 9%’ £136 trial emu”: Iieeés in be .::’e:s»$<;;g*e:£–'_."
this appéai by the State is afiawsti ji§i_£ig'3méi:§i_§<jf."if'::§:
appéilate c<::=u;z*1: is set aside afi{§–.I{ha3; 05?.' ..§33;*c'*;i1{is 2 L'
I'€'.Si€31'€d .
16. Ti}? res;3f2:i§:gt§1f;:{f.é.§s%:§§1′ V A.’,«V}sr,E:ai;i fszthwéih
Sllfffiildfif ‘hefar€: §}3$ ihe Sfifiifilliff,’
jmygesed ‘apq:z:: «V iaks zmeassazy
sfcys to v$sj§’§.;i£’e %E1é;:_; ;%:c’L§s6d 550 as {(22 51:31am:
{hat S€’E}.t€I1{‘,€. A {tsp}! of {Em
§11€£g131e::t’«:§.§i::£afé§, v”:3%:~;– trial coimi §£:3rihw’éi33 fez’
campiiaiicc.
, 1′}’–..,_ flmartgowcia, Eearmité cemzsei has appeazsid
as*;A§:*:.::’.§1s5 iijgiiéaé zimfi assistsg}; fizis maxi an Eéehaif af tfxs
~Vz*s3;}::fi}sLs§eif:.:=é;€§:ri:$€dg Timrefwm, E {§iI’€sf3’E {ha .i3€&gis”£3:’§; ta: paj; a
Vfgze” a;:f.4Rsa:§,Qf}8j – is {£16 f§mi{I’i}£f§ Curias ai, {ha srariiwiz.
Sd/-3
Judge
«~ Kmgz
{Eva