Bangalore District Court
State By Jalahalli Traffic Police vs Raju T.P. S/O Thomas on 17 February, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
TRAFFIC COURT- III BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016
PRESENT; SMT. C.M.PUSHPALATHA, B.A.,LL.B.
M.M.TR.C.III, BANGALORE.
C.C.No. 16360/2015
COMPLAINANT; State by Jalahalli Traffic Police
Station., Bangalore.
(State by : Learned Sr. APP)
V/s
ACCUSED: Raju T.P. S/o Thomas, 60 years, R/o
No. 29/2, 1st B 4th Main, Chowdappa
Layout, Bengaluru.
(Represented by Sri. K.N., Adv.)
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Jalahalli Traffic police has charge sheeted the accused with an allegation that he has committed the offence punishable U/sec. 279 and 338 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
That on 11.3.2015 at about 1.20 p.m. the accused being the driver of maxicab bearing No. KA 01 AA 1885 drove the same on HMT Road, in a high speed in rash and negligent 2 CC 16360/2015 manner which endangers to human life and dashed against a car bearing no. KA 01 AB 8502, due to the impact the passenger of the said car i.e. CW-2 sustained grievous injuries. On receipt of the complaint in this regard from CW-1, CW-8 registered the case against the accused in Cr No.31/15, then he visited to the spot and drawn the spot mahazar and prepared the sketch, then he recorded the statement of witnesses and issued notice U/s 133 of MV Act to owner of the offending vehicle and received reply, then arrested the accused and released him on bail and made requisition to the RTO to inspect the vehicle, then on receiving the IMV report and wound certificate from the concerned officers and after completion of investigation he filed the charge sheet against the accused.
3. This court took the cognizance of the offence and the accused was provided with the copies of the charge sheet. When plea was read over to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3 CC 16360/2015
4. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined one witness out of 8 witnesses as PW-1 and got marked 9 documents as per Ex.P.1 to 9.
5. The statement of the accused as provided under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and when the incriminating evidence appearing against the accused was read over to him, he pleaded guilty. Further the accused counsel filed a memo stating that he has no objections to given up the witnesses namely Cws. 1 to 7 with consent.
6. The points that arise for consideration are :
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 11.3.2015 at about 1.20 p.m. the accused being the driver of maxicab bearing No. KA 01 AA 1885 drove the same on HMT road in a high speed rash and negligent manner which endangerous to human life and thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec.279 of IPC?
2) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused drove the said vehicle in a high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed against a car bearing no. KA 01 AB 8502, due to the impact the 4 CC 16360/2015 passenger of the said car i.e. CW-2 sustained grievous injuries and thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec. 338 of IPC?
3) What order ?
7. Findings on the above points are as follows, because of the below discussed reasons:
Point Nos.1 and 2 : In the Affirmative.
Point No.3 : As per the final order.
:: R E A S O N S ::
8. POINT Nos.1 and 2 : To avoid the repetition of discussions, these points are taken up for discussion together.
The allegations against the accused is that on 11.3.2015 at about 1.20 p.m. the accused being the driver of maxicab bearing No. KA 01 AA 1885 drove the same on HMT Road, in a high speed in rash and negligent manner which endangers to human life and dashed against a car bearing no. KA 01 AB 8502, due to the impact the passenger of the said car i.e. CW- 2 sustained grievous injuries.
9. CW-8 examined as PW-1 he deposed that on he on 12.3.2015 at about 3.30 CW.1 lodged the complaint, in this 5 CC 16360/2015 regard he registered the case against the accused in Cr No.31/15 and then he visited to the spot and drawn the spot mahazar and prepared the sketch, then he recorded the statement of witnesses and issued notice U/s 133 of MV Act to owner of the offending vehicle and received reply, then arrested the accused and released him on bail and made requisition to the RTO to inspect the vehicle, then on receiving the IMV report and wound certificate from the concerned officers and after completion of investigation he filed the charge sheet against the accused.
10. Among the witnesses examined by the prosecution CW.8 - PW.1 is the investigating officer.
11. With the consent of accused counsel CWs.1 to 7 are given up on the other hand the learned APP has not objected the consent given by the accused counsel.
12. Learned APP argued that accident was occurred only due to the fault of accused who drove the said vehicle in rash and negligent manner. In that concern, CW-8 who is none other than the investigating officer who has supporting the 6 CC 16360/2015 prosecution case. Therefore, he prays for convict the accused for the said offences.
13. In a Road Traffic Accident Cases first the prosecution has to prove the rash and negligent driving of accused. In order to prove this fact the case in hand the prosecution fully depend upon the evidence of CW-8 who is none other than the investigating officer of this case who deposed about the accident. On the other hand the accused has not disputed the fact that he was the driver of said vehicle on the day of the accident. Here itself it is pertinent to note that while recording 313 statement the accused has admitted the allegations against him and has stated that he will not commit such mistakes in future. As such it can be safely said that the accused does not dispute the fact that the accident had occurred due to his rash and negligent driving. In view of the discussion made supra, this court considered view that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the offence punishable U/s. 279 and 338 of IPC. Hence point Nos.1 and 2 are answered IN AFFIRMATIVE.
7 CC 16360/2015
14. POINT No.3: In view of the above discussions and findings, I proceed to pass the following ORDER Accused is convicted U/s.255(2) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable U/s. 279 and 338 of IPC.
The accused shall pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable U/s.279 of IPC.
Further the accused shall pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable U/s.338 of IPC.
In total the accused shall pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- on default he shall undergo S.I. for a period of 30 days.
His bail bonds and surety bonds shall stand cancelled after the appeal period.
(Dictated to the typist directly on computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 17th day of February 2016.) (C.M.PUSHPALATHA) M.M.T.C.III, B'LORE.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION:
PW.1 H.R. Vishwanath 8 CC 16360/2015 LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 Complaint Ex.P.2 FIR Ex.P.3 Mahazar Ex.P.4 Rough sketch Ex.P.5 Notice Ex.P.6 Reply Ex.P.7 Wound certificate Ex.P.8 IMV Report Ex.P.9 Indemnity Bond
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR ACCUSED.
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR ACCUSED.
NIL M.M.TR.C.III, B'LORE.