- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Appellant calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the criminal revision filed by the appellant questioning correctness of the judgment of learned Second Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Hassan. The appellant was convicted for offences punishable u/s. 304-A, 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC ). He was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 700.00 for the offence punishable u/s. 279 of the Indian Penal Code, Rs. 300.00 for the offence punishable u/s. 337 of the Indian Penal Code and simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable u/s. 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. Default stipulations were provided in respect of the fines imposed. An appeal was preferred which was partially allowed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hassan. The conviction in terms of Sec. 279 was set aside. However, in respect of Ss. 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code the conviction was maintained along with the sentences imposed. In the revision petition filed before the High Court the primary stand was that there was no rash and negligence involved because the vehicle capsized because of mechanical failure. The High Court did not find any substance and dismissed the revision petition.
(3.) The factual position in a nutshell is as follows : On 23.7.1996 at about 11 a.m. the revision petitioner/accused being the driver of a lorry bearing No. K.L. 13-4363, was proceeding on Hassan-Arsikere Road, near Sankenahalli gate and drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed; against a tree, which was by the side of the road and caused death of Shivanna, Bililyamma, Basheer and caused bleeding injuries to C.Ws. 3 to 5, who were travelling in the said lorry sitting in the cabin. Two of them died at the spot and the third person died on the way to the hospital. C.Ws. 3 to 5 sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, the accused was charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Ss. 279, 337 and 304-A of of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court took congnizance of the offence and registered the case. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused examined 10 witnesses as P Ws. 1 to 10 on its behalf and closed its side. The accused denied the incriminating evidence, which was appearing against him, but he did not choose to examine any witness on his behalf.;