Madras High Court
P.Meganathan vs State Represented By on 31 August, 2017
Author: C.T.Selvam
Bench: C.T.Selvam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 31.08.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.R.C.No.1424 of 2011 P.Meganathan S/o.Panneer ... Petitioner vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Kancheepuram Town Police Station, Kancheepuram. Crime No.551 of 2009 ... Respondent Criminal Revision filed under section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against judgment of learned District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram, passed in C.A.No.24 of 2011 on 19.09.2011 confirming the judgment of learned Judicial Magistrate II, Kancheepuram, passed in C.C.No.139 of 2011 on 24.05.2011. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Rajasekar For Respondent : Mr.V.Arul Additional Public Prosecutor ***** O R D E R
This revision arises against two concurrent judgments of Courts below convicting petitioner/accused for offences u/s.279, 337 and 304-A IPC and sentencing him to fine of Rs.500/- i/d 15 days S.I. for each of the offences u/s.279 and 337 IPC and 6 months S.I. and fine of Rs.5,000/- i/d 3 months S.I. for offence u/s.304-A IPC.
2. Prosecution case is that on 30.05.2009 at about 06.00 a.m., petitioner/accused drove the vehicle viz., Tata Sumo Victor bearing registration No.TN-23-AR-7227 at a high speed and negligent manner resulting in death of one and injuries to another. A case in Crime No.551 of 2009 on the file of respondent has been registered for offences u/s.279, 337 and 304-A IPC. Upon completion of investigation and filing of final report, the case was tried in C.C.No.139 of 2011 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate II, Kancheepuram.
3. Before trial Court, prosecution examined 9 witnesses and marked 9 exhibits. None were examined on behalf of defence nor were any exhibits marked. On appreciation of materials before it, under judgment dated 24.05.2011, convicted petitioner/accused for offences u/s.279, 337 and 304-A IPC and sentenced him to fine of Rs.500/- i/d 15 days S.I. for each of the offences u/s.279 and 337 IPC and 6 months S.I. and fine of Rs.5,000/- i/d 3 months S.I. for offence u/s.304-A IPC. There against, petitioner/accused preferred C.A.No.24 of 2011 on the file of learned District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram, which came to be dismissed under judgment dated 19.09.2011. Hence, this revision.
4. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor as also perused materials on record.
5. Neither PW-1, who was a co-traveller in the Tata Sumo vehicle which capsized resulting in death of one and injury to PW-1 nor PW-2, who was driving a Car immediately behind the Tata Sumo vehicle which met with an accident have spoken to rash and negligent driving by revision petitioner/accused. PW-1 has spoken to the vehicle having been driven at high speed by petitioner/accused, of it suddenly running zigzag before toppling over while PW-2 has informed that Tata Sumo vehicle suddenly capsized. This Court would allow the revision both for the reason that material witnesses have not spoken to the Tata Sumo vehicle having been driven in a rash and negligent manner as also owing to awareness that during the period of accident, there were very many cases of Tata Sumo vehicles toppling/capsizing.
C.T.SELVAM, J gm For the aforesaid reasons, the Criminal Revision Case shall stand allowed. The judgment of learned District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram, passed in C.A.No.24 of 2011 on 19.09.2011 confirming the judgment of learned Judicial Magistrate II, Kancheepuram, passed in C.C.No.139 of 2011 on 24.05.2011 shall stand set aside. Fine, if any, paid shall be refunded. Bail bonds, if any, executed shall stand cancelled.
31.08.2017 Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no gm To
1.The District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram.
2.The Judicial Magistrate II, Kancheepuram.
3.The Inspector of Police, Kancheepuram Town Police Station, Kancheepuram.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Crl.R.C.No.1424 of 2011