CHUNI LAL Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner having been convicted and sentenced by both the Courts below for offences punishable under Sections 279, 304-A, 337 and 338 IPC has filed revision against judgment dated 12.1.2005 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kullu in Criminal appeal No.7/2004, affirming judgment dated 22.5.2004 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu in Cr. Case No.118-II of 1998.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that on the basis of statement Ex.PW-5/A recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C. of PW-5 Ramesh Chand, FIR Ex.PW-8/A was registered at Police Station, Kullu. The further case of the prosecution is that complainant hired jeep No.HP-34-49-0072 and he was travelling in that jeep, petitioner was driving bus No.HP-34-1440 in high speed, the bus was ahead of the jeep. At Sarsari curve petitioner could not control the bus and it fell down due to rash and negligent driving of petitioner. In the accident nine persons had died. The injured were removed to hospital who suffered simple and grievous injuries. On completion of investigation, challan was submitted against petitioner. The notice of accusation was put to petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC. The petitioner denied the accusation and claimed trial. The prosecution has examined thirteen witnesses. The statement of petitioner was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he pleaded that tie rod of the bus had broken due to which brakes failed and did not function which caused the accident. The petitioner did not lead any evidence in defence.

(3.) On conclusion of trial, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 22.5.2004 convicted the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 338 and 304A IPC. The petitioner was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for six months under Section 279 IPC, one year imprisonment under Section 304-A IPC and fine of Rs.1000/-, six months imprisonment under Section 337 IPC and six months imprisonment under Section 338 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was directed to undergo further imprisonment for two months. All sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal on 12.1.2005, hence revision.