SUNIL KUMAR GARG, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner against the judgment and order dated 18.6.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No. 13/2001 by which he dismissed the appeal of the accused petitioner and confirmed the judgment and order dated 8.1.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pipar City in Criminal Case No. 168/91 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate convicted the accused petitioner for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC and sentenced in the following manner: JUDGEMENT_1158_TLRAJ0_2001.htm All the above substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this revision petition, in short, are as follows: On 13.4.1991 at about 12.45 AM, PW -9 Kewal Krishna lodged a written report Ex.P/7 with the Police Station Khedapa District Jodhpur stating inter -alia that on 12.4.1991, he alongwith Jeep Driver Lalji (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) came to Jodhpur in Jeep No. RRF 3640 which was being driven by deceased and at about 11.00 PM in the night, they left Jodhpur for Bikaner and in the night at about 12.15 AM before Police Station, Khedapa, a Truck bearing No. RJW 4797 from the opposite side which was being driven by the accused petitioner came with fast speed and the accused petitioner dashed that Truck against the Jeep, as a result of which deceased died on the spot and PW9 Kewal Krishna also received some injuries on his head and PW -7 Ravindra Singh and PW -4 Mohandan, both Constables in the Police Station, Khedapa also rushed towards the spot and body of the deceased was taken out from the Jeep and the accused petitioner was caught and on being asked, he told his name as Ram Niwas (present accused petitioner). On this report, police registered the case for the offence Under Sections 279, 304 -A and 337 IPC against the accused petitioner and chalked out regular FIR Ex.P/8 and started investigation. After usual investigation, the police submitted challan in the Court of Magistrate, Pipar City against the accused petitioner for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC. The contents of the charges for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC were read over to the accused petitioner on 21.10.1992. The accused petitioner denied the contents of the charges and claimed trial. During trial, in support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and got exhibited some documents. Thereafter the statement of the accused petitioner Under Sections 313 Cr. P.C. was recorded. No evidence was led in defence by the accused petitioner. After recording evidence and conclusion of trial, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pipar vide his judgment and order dated 8.1.2001 convicted the accused petitioner for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC and sentenced in the manner as indicated above, holding inter -alia: (1) That prosecution has proved that on the relevant day, the Truck in question was being driven by the accused petitioner and the Truck in question was being driven by the accused petitioner rashly and negligenly and the accused petitioner dashed that Truck against the Jeep in question, as a result of which, deceased died on the spot and PW -9 Kewal Krishna received injuries. (2) That the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused petitioner for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 8.1.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pipar City, the accused petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, which was transferred to the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, who vide his judgment and order dated 18.6.2001 dismissed the appeal of the accused petitioner and confirmed the judgment and order dated 8.12001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Calss, Pipar City by which accused petitioner was convicted for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC and sentenced in the manner as indicated above. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 18.6.2001 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Jodhpur, the accused petitioner has preferred this revision petition before this Court. In this revision petition, the learned Counsel appearing for the accused petitioner has not much assailed the findings of conviction recorded by both the courts below against the accused petitioner for the offence Under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A IPC, but his main contention is two fold: (i) That the accused petitioner be released under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act; or (ii) That in awarding sentence, lenient view be taken and the sentence of the accused petitioner be reduced to the period already undergone by him, as he is in jail since 18.6.2001.
(3.) ON the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgments and orders of the courts below.;