This is a Criminal Appeal by the State against an acquittal in a motor accident case involving rash driving and causing death. The High Court noted a delay of 59 days in filing the appeal but considered the matter on merits.
Criminal Appeal dismissed; acquittal of the respondent upheld.
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 KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1279 OF 2012
BETWEEN:
State of Karnataka, By Yashavanthapura Tr. Police Station, Bangalore. …APPELLANT
(By Shri. K.R. Keshavamurthy, State Public Prosecutor 1)
AND:
Santhosh Kumar, Son of Basavaiah, 29 years, Resident of Neelattahalli, Kunigal Taluk – 572 130. …RESPONDENT
(Respondent served)
This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(1) and (3) of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the State Public Prosecutor for the State praying to grant leave to file an appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 01.02.2012 passed by the M.M.T.C.-III, Bangalore in C.C.No.3272/2007 –
2
acquitting the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 279, 304 of IPC and Section 134(a) and (b) read with 187 of IMV Act.
This appeal coming on for Orders this day, the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
There is a delay of 59 days in filing the appeal.
However, the appeal itself is considered on merits.
offence punishable under Section 279, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’, for brevity) and under Section 134 (a & b) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It was alleged that on 8.4.2007 at about 10.40 p.m. within the jurisdiction of the Yeshwanthpur Traffic Police Station, the accused who was a driver of a water tanker, had driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and had dashed against a pedestrian Valsan, who was proceeding along the road near 5th Cross, resulting in grievous injuries and he had succumbed at the spot. It is alleged that the
3
accused had failed to provide first aid to the injured and also failed to inform the police about the accident and hence, had committed an offence punishable as aforesaid.
4
The learned State Public Prosecutor though vehemently
seeks to urge a case for admission, there is no merit in this matter. Hence, though the delay could be condoned, as the respondent has been served, the matter lacks merit and is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE
KS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Appeal by the State should be allowed despite delay.
Whether the acquittal of the accused is supported by evidence.
Whether the trial court's suspicion regarding the sole eye-witness is relevant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Karnataka
Santhosh Kumar
Anand Byrareddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
