Case Note & Summary
The revision petitioner, Dyaniyal S/o Malku Army, was convicted by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad in C.C. No. 309/2019 for offences under Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304A (causing death by negligence) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs.1,000 for Section 279 IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.10,000 for Section 304A IPC. The conviction was upheld by the II Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge, Bidar, sitting at Basavakalayan, in Criminal Appeal No. 5006/2022 dated 07.01.2023. Aggrieved, the accused filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench. The High Court heard the matter and examined the evidence. The court noted that the prosecution's case was based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, but their statements were inconsistent and contradictory regarding the manner in which the accident occurred. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was driving rashly or negligently. The court also observed that the lower courts had not properly appreciated the evidence and had erred in convicting the accused. Consequently, the High Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the judgments of conviction and sentence, and acquitted the accused of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rash Driving and Negligence - Sections 279, 304A IPC and Section 187 MV Act - Conviction based on inconsistent evidence - The prosecution alleged that the accused drove a vehicle rashly and negligently causing death of a person - The court found that the evidence of eyewitnesses was contradictory and unreliable, and the prosecution failed to prove the manner of accident or negligence - Held that the conviction cannot be sustained and the accused is entitled to acquittal (Paras 2-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the accused for offences under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is sustainable in law based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the judgments of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and appellate court, and acquitted the accused of all charges.
Law Points
- Criminal Law
- Motor Vehicles Act
- Indian Penal Code
- Rash Driving
- Negligence
- Causing Death by Negligence
- Burden of Proof
- Benefit of Doubt
