Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a road accident on 30.10.2016 at about 2.15 p.m. on Mohanur to Karur Road near Vangal Bridge. The defacto complainant Jagadeeswaran's father Kuppusamy was riding a two-wheeler with his wife Chellammal as pillion rider. A car driven by the accused Boopathi coming from the opposite direction allegedly hit the two-wheeler, causing grievous injuries to both riders and death of Kuppusamy on the way to hospital. The police registered FIR under Sections 279, 338 and 304A IPC and filed charge sheet. The trial court convicted the accused and sentenced him to fine under Sections 279 and 338 and six months simple imprisonment under Section 304A. The appellate court confirmed the conviction. The accused filed revision before the High Court. The High Court examined the evidence of eyewitnesses PW1, PW2 and PW3 and found material contradictions regarding the manner of accident, the position of vehicles, and whether the car was driven rashly. The court noted that the prosecution failed to examine independent witnesses and the evidence was inconsistent. The court held that the prosecution did not prove rash and negligent driving beyond reasonable doubt. The revision was allowed, conviction set aside, and the accused acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rash and Negligent Driving - Sections 279, 338, 304A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution alleged that the accused drove a car in a rash and negligent manner, hit a two-wheeler, causing death and injuries. The court found material contradictions in the evidence of eyewitnesses regarding the manner of accident and the position of vehicles. Held that the prosecution failed to prove rashness or negligence beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-26).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of IPC for causing death and injuries due to rash and negligent driving is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The revision is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence dated 21.10.2021 in CA.No.48 of 2021 by the Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act, Namakkal, confirming the judgment dated 24.02.2021 in CC.No.116 of 2017 by the Judicial Magistrate II, Namakkal, is set aside. The petitioner/accused is acquitted of all charges. The fine amount, if paid, shall be refunded to the petitioner.
Law Points
- Rash and negligent driving must be proved beyond reasonable doubt
- Inconsistencies in witness testimony lead to benefit of doubt
- Conviction cannot be based on surmises and conjectures
.png)
