Mohammadfazal vs The State Of Karnataka By Thojeda Police ... on 19 March, 2008

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mohammadfazal vs The State Of Karnataka By Thojeda Police ... on 19 March, 2008

Bench: Jawad Rahim

IN THE HIGH COURT OF IKARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 19*" our OF MARCH, 2008 

BEFORE

THE HOWBLE MR JUSTICE JAWAD   V  " 1 L

BETWEEN:

    
510 MOHAMMAD HUSEIIESHAIRIH '

-'E55vEAas, cc-:: ua1~..'&:=-., %    %  

M05159, (ews),
WDASHGK  ' '3 
BELGALIM.  %   

THE STATE'   '
av T1-1:12! EDA Pause smnom

A_"'f" Ill. I§]'|.I.f.li.-H

ru Namnnm 

 Rgpnasemenzav THE"'H'IGH counr
":l"'i.,iEi.il_.""» PW'9$E§$UTﬁR,

 3.; .. RESPONDENT

V mv 'gﬂr .4: n'h}rr.hM Ann! mam W. I MI 'I I I VV'."44}ii'l'DER sscnozu 39: am am CR.P.C. vngvxuca To 551' Ill PEI!!! l'I'u$'I.f\. I El'! T"'riES7~CRIF'1':H:7\L ru:1u.=u.u'I'i F::"a'.L'u'1.'\'}I'I' I5 ﬁunu ﬁ$IQE"ﬁ:THE omen ow CGHVICTTON Aura sEi~1TEi~:<:E %;mmsu 21.3.2095 mssen IN CRL.A.33,fD-4 PASSED 5'! % jrneé 5.4., FAST TRACK COURT 1 KARWARAND Tl-IE omen $4.15 "="m :=.»=~..%Ee av 'm= H-W MNHELI 1!! cs:

% ~ % .fNo.a1a;o2..

bl}; H} V"I' I I III urn 'Ital; u'r1IIur THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

aw' \J ﬁm"-- 'F the 'triﬁi crzurt and the first appeiim convicting him far oﬂencas under Sapztjon' u 2 of tha Indian Penal Code and v'a¢n+.jraqsL:e«nt_? "s§'nt§.€i:g"*::i.' imposed by the trial 7 'equrt"'-V. ':1.-ms; ﬁnedlfind V' by then appanaue Court no thus axtuFjr;::raqica£od«T%in% said Jgdgnzene V A H u V 2

2. I have Vijatha R. Null:

for the pVa'l:i_tin_n~:aa.;n.* grnunds to negate the ﬁnding -'the reasoning of the first apnenaua , 3.. _, : a a'i.a'""§é'§aﬁ iii tiiaii ﬁrrauriﬁi, I have aicarﬁiniﬁ tha

-3-..T4'l1is'" is a case where the petitioner-accused is min in have driven mo lam; nearing No. RA 0: c 159 In T in:-'vr§sh and nggliggnt manner an 1§IIJ5-FELIJ2 e.n..re:.a*..e Q ha highway at 5% a.m., CD II is' El 5 E.' '15 I5 ....I :3: :5 2:

ar I in U! E! :l HI I"?

he promaded in drive in a reckiess manner lasing control Cy?"

of thl vahlcla consoqulnt to which he crushed the workman sleeping at the conatrucltion site on the bﬂdgat near Jalakatti. The victim was one Hanurruantl1ag:pa:;_A*:w':'_iji'i.' diced Instantnnaoul-g.

5. mifrﬁrt iﬁ tiiii TiﬁET.'| was submitted byEshiv'u£1ari:d""i ' Hadpad in the SH0 of Ramﬁa:ﬁ_'0r_ policﬂon 10.05.2002 in which ha qduamaaiithﬁhtiiﬁhﬁi01610512002. he had 9000 00 Jalakatlri for of bridge. with |'_t'ir'n"i',««A,§t|1ei.'_ cs:-0.iies3'4v%«f§iié.i=e._._.I§V&0 at work on 1??!L1$*"7m2.. ii _ .'.'-.g,."' S-.0000';-e and :3?

Hiﬁur'ﬁ0iiif'h'é*0*0é?f§§i§~%§iVEiﬁﬁﬁiﬁﬁ 0000'. at ';':'.Wa.rT1., u the wily vvimdrnihn he and Sangappa woke up and _ pr00isaded.V'.*--b0"v. éﬁhwer the nature call while 3 "Eda 0wrh5i1ti30ppa'wa0Vshaping. At l:hat moment lorry driven tnwards Goa from Rnmanagar bdﬁsﬁfiiction. The driver by his negiiyenoe hit against it ---1.".'i?i0iiumanthappa, who win shaping and crushed him under V 31-0 whuauals of the tarry. He died.

A0 (32%?

C 'Tina .-g-A-£11.; ;.|.nII--5 3-u.-nan-uIo:.un--u.In.n-cl , n ._--;v----- .-'LII-_.-. ----.I

0. III: was was mvuauguwu U] nunluaur PUIIEH CHIS! chargo sheet was filed against the accused for the offenoos under ﬁactions 279 and 3049.) of the Indian Peng1i1'7HCot!j*oV:."v'A.' and allso under Section 134 of the Motor ' aocuood was put to trial during vvhii:'h'..=tho oxomioaod in all 3 wltnosos, Iallall --:3=~ accused guilty anti convtgted.*l'h'Ito.f'ogoinst«'i-ihich; the accused was in appeal l *l_\lo.33f2004. The loan-nod Jud;_;o;.Lt"i§tst tho ﬁnding of the guilt ago under suction 3o-4 A Em ggqulmq him for ﬁmnnmum nﬂmr 3 any. '3', ll-HF I-'Ian Mnhnr 'fall-ulnlan HJIIUI-"av? HIIUWI §W§lHFv1'li9 'U' VI Hall" I IVHVI VWIIIVIWU Act am-ti hasuloft-to sot oo;_iﬁe~7the sontanoa For on oﬁanco 27§"'ur.._.I5a.-o Indian Penal Code against which V.'*tl1io.tooisivoh'i$

7. counsel took me through tho Ivldoncl ho t I411: I-ni-nlvnunnf niunn Hu ...1...:I1Innn:|n|-I !.:'UIflVlVI'Fll'v;"!g HI-w Iruuvirlllwluu 'um-Iivlu H' 3 In no urlllv-III:-Iuun hﬁaiousoplpa i"H-ndapaci and F-'xv-2 E-'songoppa wouio' oniy show that deceased Hanumunthappa was sleeping on the sand dumped at the site of the construction. None would AU?

k/ __ $_____nn._-

iiiﬁﬁitiﬁir "r'ﬁﬁ " iiiii if "'Lif'ﬁ an ﬁEI'E:I' rliica. zoucanuly

5. il: was urgo that though sangappa says he was sleeping with Hanumnnthappn, he has gone away form tha4V.lI:s.,:_i§V'.!V:'Vcj K defacating and thus he was not present: at thé:_::rolnl2a'n£' timc. Tmnny she submits that the pndééc'u't!or§, mnnanan asmhlwz mg: tnnre was any nn.rn!rlg._ signal .i:;.s§"t.«;~ :a......1"c .r_'.... ...'.'. "ma-

.§.I-,Iu-III: wl =ﬂ'_¢,'-llllzf LHI users of tho road that tho~..§oIdlwnroanldﬁﬂnon-.not l1o'al:sla".'§ The accused was driving the He could not h§av§a::VVdrivc}n vnVh'lc_ljeu old narrow bridge, ﬂ1arol'oifaé:."«--n?i:' ha hncl taken o with road. s§n:'a' long! or any oI_:h¢.I..r an ' run' 'I "r.nnn.ma-I' " 'V nnzsnl I-an. Inna: an hummus and Q N' EIWBWSIW I U" 'AU 93 IHUUI all"

proconuiod fnr§:he'r;. V Viii_aA'ln§ac§?axpaci:ed any one, much less ..... «ha sleeping on the construction even though the unfortunate accident hon' in loss of human life, tho said act was nnt..h§r«;_dolibornto not of nngligencu or rncldusnoss of _ wan 5.';-sirdtlener. aha n-cal V' .___"quunstlon is "'put'oiy accidnni".

III.

nnnfnn 1-ha} 1-Hun InnlrInn4I- In Inn-Ilvwll sluuun MIIC Illvlulwllh III _..:

nereforo, the prococuizion dhvhwas failed to establish thorn was "negligence" or /'ML U 13! B. The lnnrned Additional State Public ' PM-in, supported him lmpugnud judg-inant this is cane such case where negiiganr$e_a:ndA'lkeclciaéanws dyit-in'; has *9 be get!'-area F rﬁfiié nmii"-ad -*;5rt.=usrvI'i.!i~..'ri:-.'!*i-*:Ii=.

-In 3 5 wt -r-u- \-2'--'L. F: -- - -uru:-u_ 'Cl-.V -.-- uvwwu was the old bridge. The any reason traversed the vgiai§i¢¢_ new bridge which was V_n'*ntij«'._:nqt open for regular driving. me «nazi nkn:$wie«:;.~§ of the fact that in as pn..mJi'mg"¢n' was undar t_:oni_:m:_:i;ion 1 .1

-....a :.n.- ~ :9 .x.: ".

um: um': i""i.5uii tn"5uiu- sl-um-.*'..._'-'..l1at ha nae ta%r. ti-e rial: net .«-ovnly but"a«l.~.$_i_:l__.l51n iife of others. The liioctrine of AV"--ilu.VIi:n:.¢--v.lVn'quii:i.:ii',_ if applied to the foam would show that mu'nhntialusniil1A'ii;fd.'.1ivnVdu|u0d in act which amounts to culpable _ 'nfaqlignnciil-gnti rightly. the trial Court found him guilty. 'V V _ '"'v.ni'§unmn*m nf Smt Vijai:i1a R iiiaiic, learned counsai For trim petitiomr were appealing, but on careful examination of {§>07_/ h V

- driving th

-«J?

masons The F..." that there was ale !e.,auar rec; !§?""'s'I.®i.f dispute. It is also not In dispute that the1a§:t§ us§d*_T.j'w§éT' 1 V driving that goods carriaga |oad§id'"' wlth Nnturalﬂy, he was expuctod tau bi":.'m:§_'rva'T' céi:tio.§.§s cnncom of his own safotv and»'sa.fotv hﬁﬁthprcy VA and he should have driven the ﬁéh,f:.':%a 1keep!ng'§ﬁ1ni'iajdVVfhe nature of topography qfjha 7i?:u_r;_:w.ret'fi:c'uiAi: ~61' the 1 III Inn 41' Inlnmn Hanna In Iulunar Hlnl-'.|II' III!» N 'NW I-Jail' I-I5 uh uljaun innuAI1lAJ In 'I "Ii ,5 IIIVUIVQKJ III .. -. ._ _ .., "-:5 §.';f,a,a'iilsI_IgIaI_i under that ma-vision of of tas?'Mcm§ii."'ufa.hécIus Act. The evidence arf;"Sé_r:sfai'3§é.a.: vitdiffetboratiun fmm tho evidence _of..SH'i1f:é'I1E-1§'gd_E§E£j§};3h~lEiﬂﬂﬁ|JBd. Both wars cu-

labourerza 'with1Ei$_w(ictim«..Han_umanl:l1appa and they spent the wig I1?» v'l::agVelhVV¢V,-;r?[j_LjV~ Qhfﬁrtunately, Hanumanthappa vehicle c...hc§vv' ananln .§c..Hvn.a.1-u.|.1i.nun Lhnla IIDAI rial Iunnn ulna. gain nnnnihlan WUMIU HIIVCI ﬂlﬂu ﬂﬁll PIJBIIIIJIB vvﬁmlcms ' though It can be said that than 'gym iiuhcr;-1y:.Hanumnntha;apa was sluplng was not usual _ I-ail nlnznn uh? lchn rlrlunn-..nrI4n||.nnrI hurl nﬁnnnn 'I-Inn rnhrl V1! |IlIi-lwwg Iva Iullwl HIIIIIII Iiﬂn-ullvwuul Hilhl In Viv In In Ilhl . ;.r'l' .' ..';a.,;

'-7.

V' ____"iwi1Vi.;i1 was not upen to driving, this wouici imiicaiaa that he . V ' pmcead tn take risk to drive the vehicle on the bridge which was under construction. Negligence in driving can U to gathorod not only from the actual act attributed to this caused but also from the omission to tal-ea nacaaaaiy pracautiom The act alleged against the traversing from that regular road to ' act of omission. is that ho did undar construction. Thou anough hoidviihim responsible for the unfort1;nat&V"oocujfroraoAa and'"'su"oh act being rasuit of his negligenao cam ambit of Saction 30-HA) of-" --Indi__an; Pé2'nai.At§odata_n3i rightly he was

-;omri:_:l'.a:_I f 2'19 and 3E_H(A',I

10.. _ .I_ do'i'r:ot"i'inVI£ arnrV"i'i1faaaon to differ from the View 'Eourt and the First Appellate court. matter of imposing punishment, the counéfgsiiilvory rightly submitted that tho Ioarnod has-I :uaI- uncle-In. I-has mnnirnnnm nﬁulnmln {visa I". W' HUI": Ell' HTIIHTIIEG Ilﬂillllﬁln 'II:

on for an offence under ﬁaction i7?! of the indiun '' Code buy imposed hrsh punishment for an offence [under %ion 3D4(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The State has not challenged. Wharefora, the question that arise is M) , 0047/ only with regard to jusﬂﬁcotion of the sentence imposed upon tho accused for an offence "under %tion 304(A§""of the Indian Penal Code. The accused has been ho a year's simple imprionmerut and to ' R.I_c2,t,IlJ|3,.i'~.., In this rongord, sho urgoijbiiiliot' 'id IuI|.r.~=r|.

ubmits that tho accused?

dependant upon him. Ho': hos miinoginﬁmcgmsoueior his manger earnings of about accused to prison would;coriooquzoniéziﬁciafiiaccii.i_'~h.io__V:§iopandonto and cliorofo-re mi :'.i.;&;T.§,:§:'*::,=.'i.':.I:a't.IV"'*i.n;ru.ti"t_i1n mg oonbanco of

11. _ _ ihoufo all grounds urged by her and :_j""i'.'!'i_a -':cjﬂ:§'ii;i|.':»:fiidA"ii55l§.2Ii1a6i"'"'L'e"i'aV learned Additional Static Public '..'i.-'izicf 'raga rd.

1::

HQ» i'i.iiciinﬁ"j:Jf iiw ioornuu triui Judge Ifliifirlf as Ehi guiﬁ ..I I _ l.'_ 1.. ..-_ . _ is concerned. The dacision of this court in Tjoimilar circurnatancoo in the case of Mohommodgous Va. 3197/ U Ian 'I III Ilka. In -Ind-I E5351 ':1. V' "HI 'I WWI" no 33 HWPIHW Ilvllllluﬂ Jaw 'N? 'bl Ii!" 'WWI «PIE! "

Hnwemyr 16 the State of Kamataka in Criminal Revsion Petition No.2:m;2on5 disposed of on 9°' October, 2on7 was raIiai¢ii.dc 13 I have perused the same In "the ?,'_jsai"id Juclnrnnnl: thn nrdar mnnrdina nan slang: af imnriariuncinnnt w---'w' any -1-, 1- w v-- --w- "31-: ----u. ----- IC'l.:I'l FIIIICY-II 'I _._.. .1--- _ ........ .._..a ._ _ _._ -2 n. In ..- __ i_..,,_"_».-_.: -_ "UH FIUTFIU CINE? ﬁll" U ﬁlull I U! HF; Jul';-UUU " "CF I]. U35" "U firm far an offanca punishabis Indian iﬁenai Code. A5 sni§n.A_ﬁ'o_m"i:li?vé'i:fc;ii§'snningAhin said judgrrient, such a decisinn.AA_j¢;;:in:9idering the peculiar facts nnﬁ:«.L;j'ircuin'Isi:ci:;ii::e£»x:iiinialSi'i?§' that can.

That *i£!!!!!iLT.*'£€...:.§ic!5i.f 'Q'! the met; and ..c...._.. _.....u..._"..'.'..'.;..... u....... ..,_Q; :3. 1... ....;;;.. a..|........a. .n..|..... ..:....:......... |..........| IuII'5nu[l'|ULUI'I'ur'WU ¥3!V"'uHE 'H55'; "A IU UEIII Lrlut. L"! UHVUI illlﬁl deviated fi:n".ﬁm.;_:A:raci.uiar road to the bridge road under Acnnstri;ictinnV...V'.'--Thai*ehy exposing hirnseif and also I-'i'JV"5'!5A"«"'"?--.'"ﬂ""'9""'Aﬁ5|"""'in§s of life and Pl'oPaI"CY: which negligence, resulting in death T of mnsidsring iii! ntbgncling Uuvwv v of ' 'cii*w_ni§_i;ances in which the accused is piaced. imposition of ' ,.___'V':ceniinnce ni' imprisonment for one year is harsh, instead, Dcnhancing the amount of fine couid he considered to help the victim': family. Q Q_/ 1'!

14.. Uﬂllif thi CIFCIJ mstnnoas, BIHIIDCI OT irnprioonrnant cannot be totaii-,r clone away. It canfha reduced to reasonable extent. I feel that the "

imprisonmant for ma year imposed on the it Vu-

Qa @L.~aaé Q a gariod of two montiﬁisiiibi A': true kclping in mind tho cuipabiiityeﬁhe pa:i:onar;iaui.a and the tragedy which ha'§s~~occLi'ri?od L-to i§nva«.vIctirii's"family. on this basis, it is appropifiaiio_to'.'onjna_noafth§ifina amount from i'~l.a.2,.0D0,f-:- 1:=0.(ii1%i5}--;4.oiut--a.of£5a-Vhich R3500,'- siiaii he dpirimiéi. .t£i"'--t?!;I'!'--f.§E3.'§.i* ai: fin and remaining as s,5m;- W "6 paid to this wire of the decaaseﬁ Hanumanvihappa. Judgmani; aiiaii therefor:

tarids Aniodifiao' fliia oiztaiitt indicated above. than observations, Revision Petition in giioiiaé iri..po_:ri:7. The impugned Judgmani: paaaci in Juciiciai iviagitrate, ﬁandaii anti the Judgmani: in " ,..i"V':ii:rii-iiinal Appeal iiIo.33,!20o4 on the file of the learned ifsaasions Judge, Fast Track court, kai-war, are modiﬁed only to the extent of quantum of punishrnant as indicated 118/ U' arﬁiiiﬁ f"1i haaaiso to he f'ﬁi'iaA*i1A€H"iI ' 11 in this ordrar. Concurrent finding of quill: mcordad against the accused for the offences under Sectlcn 2?9 and 304m of Hm Indian Pena! Code is aonfirmed. The imprimnnunt of one year impa-sad upon thgv'_a'§::§uea;.d "i§a §i° ii 'I 'E! 4::

:3 E! E! II 1! :2 :2 an _ air % an :3 .'.I' ll 2! G' 5 an £3.

ii' an El jnul 5::

£3 £3.

1! (Rupanas Ten thousand oniy). Tn(i*vaa:'V§t:cusa.V:.i 'is weeks' tima to pay the uadamo sentence for a period of aha _:_:tvv1%§i.;v_.:1i__:'a_pnait of the amount of ﬂne,3.a"aqm paid to the remove of ﬂﬁé :.:ina'§éa'aad'-«.ij§vsA'V"'célnhégnsation as prnvldid "'no accuéed'a'naii-- if bafora the triai Court to undaarga théy rarnaVi':1irig grafted of sentence.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court