A S DHARMARAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein was the accused before the trial Court and appellant before the lower appellate Court. He was prosecuted in respect of a road accident involving three motor vehicles, that took place on 07.12.2004 at about 03.45 a.m near the Seeranipuram Corporation Nursery on the Arcot Road, within the limits of R4 Pondy Bazaar Police Station, Chennai. THE three vehicles that were involved in the alleged accident are 1) a Tipper Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-09-D-5009 2) a 407 van bearing Registration No.TN-01-J-6996 and 3) a Mahindra Van bearing Registration No.TN07-H-4967.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, the above said 407 van was proceeding on the southern side of the road in the direction of East to West and the Mahindra van was also following the said 407 van in the very same direction, whereas the tipper lorry, of which the petitioner was the driver, came in the opposite direction and due to the rashness and negligence on the part of the petitioner, there occurred an accident due to the head on collision of the tipper lorry and the 407 Van. The same also resulted in the collision of the Mahindra Van with the 407, which was proceeding in front of the Mahindra Van. In the said accident, a number of persons sustained simple and grievous injuries and out of those who sustained grievous injuries, one succumbed to the injuries and thus, the petitioner was charge-sheeted and prosecuted for the offences under Sections 304(a) IPC, 338 IPC (5 counts), 337 IPC (6 counts) and Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by and challenging the conviction as well as sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court at Chennai in C.A.No.206 of 2009, which came to be disposed by the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai by Judgment dated 11.08.2010. The learned Sessions Judge, on a re-appreciation of evidence, confirmed the conviction as well as sentence and dismissed the appeal by the above said judgment. The correctness of the said judgment of the lower appellate Court is sought to be questioned by the petitioner in this criminal revision case.