Driver convicted for a fatal road accident challenged his conviction in revision. The High Court found the eyewitness evidence unreliable — the pillion rider admitted not seeing the vehicle and the other witness was absent from the spot — and the spot mahazar unconvincing as it was drawn later. Conviction set aside; petitioner acquitted.
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 - NC: 2024:KHC:13406 CRL.RP No. 890 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 890 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
MANJUNATHA, S/O NARASIMHA MURTHY, AGED 42 YEARS, KA-14-A-4002 TRAX DRIVER, R/O ARALIHALLI VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK, SHIMOGGA DISTRICT – 57730.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH CIRCLE INSPECTOR, BHADRAVATHI RURAL CIRCLE, BHADRAVATHI, REP. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.05.2015 PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., SHIMOGA, SITTING AT BHADRAVATHI IN CRL.A.NO.202/2012 AND ALSO THE
NC: 2024:KHC:13406 CRL.RP No. 890 of 2016
ORDER DATED 27.09.2012 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., BHADRAVATHI IN C.C.NO.1311/2011 AND DIRECT THAT THE PETITIONER BE ACQUITTED FOR THE OFFENCE AGAINST HIM.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner/accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 237 and 304-A of IPC.
accident occurred solely on the account of rash and negligent driving by the petitioner/accused, and further submits that P.W.2 who was traveling as pillion rider in his cross examination-in-chief has admitted that since he was the pillion rider he did not see the vehicle coming from the opposite direction. Therefore, the evidence on record does not establish that the accident occurred solely on account of rash and negligence driving by the petitioner/accused.
NC: 2024:KHC:13406 CRL.RP No. 890 of 2016
motorcycle. In his cross examination he has stated that he was not present on the spot, as on the date of the accident. The accident had taken place on 22.07.2010 at 6:30 p.m.
ORDER
ii. The impugned judgment dated 20.05.2015 passed by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Shimoga, sitting at Bhadravathi in Crl.A.No.202/2012 and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.09.2012 passed by the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Bhadravathi in C.C.No.1311/2011 are hereby set aside. The petitioner/accused is acquitted of the aforesaid offences.
iii. Bail bonds, if any, stands cancelled.
Sd/JUDGE
RKA
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the evidence established that the accident was caused solely by rash and negligent driving by the accused.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Manjunatha
The State of Karnataka
Hemant Chandangoudar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
