Bangalore District Court
State By P.S.I vs Suman.M on 11 February, 2015
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE TRAFFIC
COURT - V, BANGALORE.
PRESENT : RANGEGOWDA C.
B.A.L. LLB.
M.M.T.C - V, BANGALORE
DATED THIS 11th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015
C.C.No.14483 - 2014
COMPLAINANT : STATE BY P.S.I
PULAKESHINAGAR TR. P.S.
BANGALORE.
// VS //
ACCUSED : SUMAN.M,
S/O.MAHENDRAN,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
NO.12/1, 2ND MAIN,
3RD CROSS, CHANNAPPA LANE
COX TOWN, JEEVANAHALLY,
BANGALORE.
JUDGEMENT
This is a case registered against the accused on the basis of the charge sheet submitted by the P.S.I. Pulakeshinagar Tr. P.S. alleging the offences punishable u/Sec. 279 and 338 of IPC and u/Sec.134 (a) & (b) r/w 187 of M.V.Act.
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is as follows:
That on 19.06.2014 at about 20.30 hours., the accused being driver of the car bearing its registration No.KA.03.MS.3940 drove the 2 C.C.No.14483 - 2014 same in the rash and negligent manner at ITC Colony main road, so as to endangerous to the human life and dashed to the pedestrian. Due to the impact, the pedestrian by name Master.Jayanth, aged about 7 years fell down and sustained grievous injuries.
On the basis of the complaint lodged by the C.W.1, the P.S.I has registered the case against the driver of the car bearing its registration No.KA.03.MS.3940 alleging offences u/Sec.279 and 337 of IPC and u/Sec.134 (a) & (b) r/w 187 of M.V.Act. After completion of the investigation P.S.I. has submitted the charge sheet against the accused alleging offence u/Sec. 279 and 338 of IPC and u/Sec.134 (a) & (b) r/w 187 of M.V.Act.
3. After filing of the charge sheet it is noticed that the accused was released on police bail. After perusal of the charge sheet cognizance of the above said offence taken against the accused and case is registered. Thereafter presence of the accused is secured by issuing process. Accused was released on bail. Copies of the prosecution papers supplied to the accused. Substance of the accusation framed and read over to the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. His plea recorded accordingly. 3 C.C.No.14483 - 2014
4. Thereafter the prosecution in order to prove the accusation leveled against the accused has got examined one witness as P.W.1 and in the evidence of the prosecution cases Ex.p.1 to 7 documents are got marked.
5. Learned counsel for the accused has filed memo stating that accused is not disputing Spot Mahazar, Sketch, I.M.V report, Wound certificate, 133 notice and reply to 133 notice. Therefore at the request of Learned APP C.W.7 to 12 are given up. Learned APP prays for issuance of process to CW.1, 3 to 6, 13 and 14. In view of the counsel for the accused filing the memo as above and not cross examining PW.1, this court has come to the conclusion no purpose will be served by examining CW.1, 3 to 6, 13 and 14. Hence, by rejecting the prayer of learned APP CW.1, 3 to 6, 13 and 14 are dropped.
6. After completion of the evidence of the prosecution statement of the accused as required u/Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. is recorded. The accused has admitted the incriminating evidence in the prosecution evidence. The accused did not choose to adduce defence evidence.
4 C.C.No.14483 - 2014
7. Heard Learned APP and Learned counsel for the accused. Perused the materials and evidence on record.
8. The following points arise for my determination;
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubts that on 19.06.2014 at about 20.30 hours at ITC Colony main road, the accused being driver of Car it's bearing registration No.KA.03.MS.3940 drove the same in rash and negligent manner, so as to endangerous to human life and dashed to the pedestrian and thereby the accused committed the offences punishable u/Sec.279 of the IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubts that because of the accident the pedestrian by name Master.Jayanth, aged about 7 years fell down and sustained grievous injuries and thereby the accused committed the offences punishable u/Sec.338 of the IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubts that at the time of the accident the accused failed to provide first aid to the injured and failed to inform about the accident to the nearest P.S. and thereby accused has committed the offence punishable and U/s 134 (a) &
(b) r/w 187 of M.V.Act ?
4. What order ?
5 C.C.No.14483 - 2014
9. After hearing both sides and after appreciation of the evidence placed on record my findings on the above said points are as under:
Point No.1: In the AFFIRMATIVE;
Point No.2: In the AFFIRMATIVE;
Point No.3: In the AFFIRMATIVE;
Point No.4: As per final order
for the following:
:REASONS:
10. POINT NO.1 to 3 : Since these points are inter
connected with each other, hence taken together for consideration in order to avoid repetition.
11. In this case, the complainant is examined as PW.1 has deposed that when she was inside the home, she heard the noise of car, suddenly she came outside and saw that a car came and dashed to Jayanth who was standing in front of his home. She further deposed that after the accident, the injured - Jayanth fell down in drainage. PW.1 further deposed that after the accident accused ran away. The said Jayanth was admitted to hospital, since he was sustained grievous injuries. The PW.1 in his evidence has identified the accused before the court and also deposed in respect of the car 6 C.C.No.14483 - 2014 number which caused the accident. PW.1 further deposed that because of the mistake of accused, the accident as happened. Learned counsel for the accused has not cross-examined this witnesses.
12. The evidence of the PW.1 inspires the confidence of the court. Learned Counsel for the accused has not cross-examined the PW.1. Therefore, the evidence of PW.1 as to the rash and negligent driving of the car by the accused remained unchallenged. Moreover, the accused in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. has admitted the incriminating evidence as true.
13. In view of the above evidence on record, this court has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubts that the accused has drove the car in rash and negligent manner and caused the accident, thereby Jayanth sustained grievous injuries. Hence, point No.1 to 3 are answered in the AFFIRMATIVE.
14. Point No.4: For forgoing discussion and findings on point No.1 to 3, following order is passed:
ORDER Exercising powers u/Sec.255 (2) of the Cr.P.C., accused is hereby convicted the offences punishable u/Ss. 279 and 338 of IPC and 187 of M.V.Act.7 C.C.No.14483 - 2014
The accused sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (one thousand) for the offence punishable u/Sec. 279 of the IPC. I/D S.I. for the period of 30 days.
Further the accused sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- (one thousand) for the offence punishable u/Sec. 338 of the IPC. I/D S.I. for the period of 30 days.
Further the accused sentenced to pay fine of Rs.500/- (five hundred) for the offence punishable u/Sec. 187 of the M.V.Act. I/D S.I. for the period of 30 days.
In total fine of Rs.2,500/- (Two thousand and five hundred) Supply free copy of this judgment to the accused as per law.
The bail bond of the accused stands cancelled. (The judgment dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, transcribed and typed by him and corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this 11th day of February 2015) (RANGEGOWDA C.) METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, TRAFFIC COURT- V, BANGALORE.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION:
P.W.1 Smt.Dhanalakshmi.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION Ex.P.1 Spot Mahazar.
Ex.P.2 Sketch.
8 C.C.No.14483 - 2014
Ex.P.3 I.M.V.Report.
Ex.P.4 Wound Certificate.
Ex.P.5 & 6 Notice & Reply u/Sec. 133 of M.V.Act
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR ACCUSED:
NIL (RANGEGOWDA C.) METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, TRAFFIC COURT- V, BANGALORE.