Dismissed
The State of Maharashtra v. Shri Anil Aba Nikam
Bombay HCAPEAL/8/1991
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 8 OF 1991
The State of Maharashtra .. Appellant
versus
Anil Aba Nikam .. Respondent
Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP for the State.
None for the respondent.
CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J
DATED : 24th November 2004.
ORAL ORDER:-
1. Heard the learned APP appearing on behalf of
the State. None for the respondent.
2. The State is challenging judgement and order
passed by JMFC, Wai. By the said judgement and order
dated 28th September 1990 in regular Criminal case
2
no.61/87. The trial Court convicted the accused
u/s.89, 112, 42(1) and 123 of the Motor Vehicles Act
and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.500/- and default
to suffer Si for a period of two months. The
respondent was acquitted of the charge u/s.304A, 279,
337 of the IPC.
3. Brief facts :- On the date of the incident,
the accused was driving a kerosene tanker and had
proceeded from Bombay to Satara. There were 7 lady
passengers who were travelling in the said tanker.
According to the prosecution, the accused lost control
of the tanker since it was being driven at high speed
and left the road and fell down into a ditch. The
accused and the cleaner jumped out of the vehicle.
However, the lady passengers were injured and out of
the seven passengers in the tanker, one died on the
spot and other died subsequently. Five other ladies
received minor injuries. The prosecution has examined
one of the passengers. PW no.1 Nandkumar Sasane is a
rickshaw driver who arrived at the scene of the
offence after the incident and without preparing the
spot panchnama. PW no.2 Kamble was one of the
passengers who was travelling in the said tanker. She
has stated that at the site where the incident took
3
place, two trucks came from the opposite direction and
the driver turned the vehicle which went off the road.
The driver and the cleaner jumped out of the tanker
and vehicle fell into a ditch. Apart from this
evidence, there is no other witness examined by the
prosecution. The other two witnesses which have been
examined viz. PW no.3 Vijay Shinde and PW no.4
Mahipati Mane are the Investigating Officers who
investigated the said crime.
4. From the evidence of PW no.2, it cannot be
said that the accident had taken placed due to rash
and negligent driving of the accused. On the
contrary, it appears that the accused tried to avert
an accident which would have taken steps if he had not
turned the vehicle on the right hand side in which if
the accused had not turned the vehicle. There would
have been a head on collusion between two trucks and
possibly all the passengers would have died. Thus, in
my view the trial Court has properly appreciated the
evidence and has acquitted the accused of the offence
punishable u/s.304A 279 and 337 of the IPC. Thus,
there is no reason to interfere in the said judgement
and order passed by the trial Court.
4
5. Appeal is dismissed.
V.M. KANADE, J
The State of Maharashtra
Anil Aba Nikam
V.M. Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court