- (1.) This criminal revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 2-6-1992 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Churu (for short, the Appellate Court hereinafter) in Criminal Appeal No. 24/1992, whereby the Appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment and order dated 12-2-1987 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Taranagar (for short, the trial Court hereinafter) in Criminal Case No.14/1982, whereby the trial Court convicted the petitioner for the offences under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo six months' simple imprisonment for the offence under Sec. 304-A IPC and a fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence under Section 279 IPC. The petitioner, being aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, has filed the instant criminal revision.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor for the State. Carefully gone through the judgments and orders passed by the courts below. I have also carefully gone through the record of the trial Court.
(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged three eye witnesses, viz. PW 1 Jai Singh, PW 2 Ram Swaroop and PW 3 Sheokaran, in their statements, admitted that the accident was not due to the fault of the present petitioner and it was the deceased himself who suddenly got down from the moving truck which was being slowing reversed, without informing the petitioner who was driving the truck or the other occupants of the truck. In these circumstances, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, both the Courts below have failed to take note of this part of the prosecution witnesses and convicted the petitioner solely on the statements made by the witnesses in the examination-in-chief, without considering the evidence tested on cross-examination.;