State Of Karnataka By Kumta Police ... vs Basavaraj Siddappa Jadhav on 10 March, 2008

[Cites 6, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka By Kumta Police ... vs Basavaraj Siddappa Jadhav on 10 March, 2008

Bench: V.Jagannathan

IN THE HIG COURT' 0 KAFAATAKR RT'  ORE

I"'|..-.
LI

:5
éﬂ

_y 111. Ivlaluu £\.l'IJ|1  _ 


:BEFORE: :"Vn /

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE : v.JAcAN:§ATﬁ
CRIMINAL APPEAL mo; 

 

Siate o1"Kaﬁ1a'u.m"" ,
by Kumta Police Station.  _ 
.   mﬁppeiiant

( By Sri P.)

AND:

Sin Siﬁdappja 5¢_i9dé17,4_  Q_ 
Agetl-37 ye£a_t's,"D_.n'iver_'  
R] C5 in  Village,
llubli  , '"9§I"'District.

  V'  _  Appeal ﬁled under Section 377 of the
. "  to enhance the sentence imposed by the
mm Kalmada, Kamwara, in Crl.A.No. 123/1999,

 .. Vppdaatezii 16.5.2002, <:0nvict.ing the respondent for the
 v _p_dII'e11ees punishable under Sectiolla 279, 337, 338 and

 364-A oi' the 1.P.C. etc.

This appeal v.,-ulning on for healing this day, the
euurt delivered the following :

/\
n \

\~.../



E-3

JUDGMENT

A -- ---1':-V--C-ii 1 -- - 1 Iiﬁ 1: -W61; .-- ;-.....J'..;1 4.; cu'. usual 43:' .'t':;.--'i'.e...n1. ill ggl uy LI upplrznuus Lana I. .. .l1~.I..l.l..zl5 lug 111 with the selilclxoc pa-ssutl by the 1'espo11deul. in respect of the .u[I'::.n,1ge . Suction 304-A uf the I.P.C.;; "

S :11 nun': ll)!-'I'il.I}l I _, _)|_!I_g-_§I_$ tgﬂéxxws punishable under Set31 i01_1$AxQé?9§.._ﬁ33'?;..'_ii§38- and 304-A of the I.P.C. and se11tﬁ11::§;d E1116 of Rs. 1,000/--- and in default

- .9!' "'--VLiu't:e«1ugim!.1_1s fur the oii"<:11ue punishabic under %i;io11 I.P.C. and in respect. of the olfencc under Section 337 of the I.P.C., Lhe AA ' 1x;a1v:Vﬁ11de11t was scntcllocd to pay a line of Ra.500/- and i d**"aii}l. u. 1.uu.|J.l. 4:! line, - mzﬂeﬂrn ﬁlm ; iluprisonmcni. for lines 1no:ui.'l1s and as rcgartis the olftnuxz punishable under Sc:ct:ion 304-A of-the: I.P.C. is 3/ '- f to-I concerned, the trial G0lll'I., upon conviction of the accused, sentenced him to pay a line of Rs.2,Qb'§;"; and nlun In nndtt-un 1-im I'! |- nnlj I II 1;! _t__s_j'""ﬁ--. Idltau nu I.I.IJ. CB'! 165' Vt'-pup 'goal: -a--..__.--- -a _ ~.. '.-._g.---'. .. and in defauit of payment of jjne, to"

rigorous ixuprisonluent for one :_j1::o11t1.1_.' Ti1je__A lower' appellate count w1d'nmci i' the massed by the trial__ aforesaid appellate passed for the 304--A of the I.P.C.

appellate court, while upon the respondent,

---.-.1:r:.'-.1 tn. _ .. ' ' . .= .. .LuULlu1I3tA._ uv nuuujnutgu u auzluuuvu uuu: aux :.uva.nun-.v 1\u P 5 1 .5 L 3 I 3 I

-u 5 5 In 5 E 7' 5 I I I 3 '4 C 3 I 3 U I

gill'! daye' S;I...__and the said period was eet off against o }%'eme period by taking the aid or Section 423 of Aggrieved by the lower appellate court i1;t..fi'g:1?j;_ with the sentence of six molllllziiiilposed by . .. ._.--.-I V' ,_ the uriai court, the Sate has up iii I':'|'ppl:u.I. _ __ __4 .4' «I. .11'.._....... conviction oi' the veepondeni. in iespeet 1 u e ' ucuuca with which he was charged under Sections 279, 337. 338 and 304-A of the I.P.C. in eon11ecl.io11 with the respondent having driven the vehicle CTW on 6i4i1991 i_u s.~.n. 11¢.

_; LL11- __@ge1;L hit against a hiiiock on the side » thereby 25 passengers, who by the accused, susla_ii_1e1} VA mother of the no the iuln Lhe saigi'*a__speet'0f iriew oi' the iewer ap1>ellal,e conviction of the 1es}M.nn--a¢1e"11£"f§»i1r;:'_ the . Therefore, the omyswuawm to the ilxlerﬁarenoe by the ' ;1:I'.:1iL--i.t311able under Section 304-15 of the I.P.C. Asubmission made by the learned Govermneln A. for the State is that, though tl1e11'ial eourl. Ind 'V "ee11I.em:ed the respondent to six months implﬁsumneul in _¢_1«1:u_m; he payment of line of Re.2,000_l-, the lower I appeiiaie eeuit net have the ube%:%'*..-.'e sentence by only lwetuining the fine amotmt and Iedueiug n'\ (P Kill the substantive sentence only to 28 days imprisonment. In support of the above submission, %'v'ei'nn1ei' Piﬁer zelieme on two gleciaeat-,e"-:\,_l' 56:. ma 2% t t the Apex Court leported in "

C1°I.L.J. 2020.

5. On behalf of S it submitted by the him that the judgment of mquires no

6. a Vs. Krishna' @ m'-e no.-m 1. tag" A @1937 so 861, the Apex Court. held ....,.4,_ ,.-- ___.__,.. -.,.. that it was-not on the part of the High not Lg:§t:vevn_e1ttltéi11:.rec1'tl1e aentaeuce of line when the driver V Twnsv-v._eon\(Ticted for killing one person and injuring to '_e'motJ.1.eI¥;I._ Taking into account the facts and L'i3"-'.:"'A"-""3"-"l":".S H 11-e -'-H - 1;- 1.:.-... ﬂ-.. _l..e eI_.~n-..nt__. I.Iul:d-I Inlﬂl \I \.'J J \.II.--.I.('l I-ll-I V' ~. _ by the trial court, the Apex Court, in order to meet the ends of justice, enhanced the sentence for conviction under Section 304-11 of the I.P.C. to six months rigorous imprisonment and to gay ﬁne of 9, /.9 {>-

Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment ofﬁne, In "mango rigomus ill.l1l'i80l1'l.llt3Ill. for two mosnﬂls.

7. In ﬂll0I.hCl' decision in [he of uuaiuui-Inn' 'III Olin I'-I I-'>\J\I "I la', BO .2 til C-4 _ as » :3 IO 53 3 E I E I L3 E "-1 9&-

Lho High Conn, in Iiui. scllwnce under Vi-ilxdvéulao nuwd that i11tc1'l'c1'o11ot.-. by the rovisional t;uL11't is not '.%:t*;l.:n1'1l1oa]Ll1y ylooodonl. a of the OITGIKJC3 punishable under sgcupxl éo~4gAo or am i;P.C. ' X rega1'd to the above decisions and in tho the trial oourl. also having found on LI; I.. aL:\.I..1I-ml ,:I.Ls&_:1gc_21~s, wl; \I.I't_l in tho knry V' iiiiivell by the axxiuaod, susiained isiiiipi" iii' Iiiis, aim the wound ourtjﬁoauzs having been produoeci as per Ex.P-8 to P-23 in respect of the injured persons and l'u11:l1er, one Chandannna. Iuothor of the baidegtunn, 23", K also sustaining serious injuries leading to her death mid P.M. report also having been pluduced as I EB In of the 01 'nimI that I11. ;__I,u;1;:ie::tf+t:;<.§:;.?L:,e¢§al, t.herei'ove, secure the ends ofjustiee a1ul.__al-eon 1;.» '*"et1J ' the otller drivers to be vehicles pa1'tieL1la1fly of

1.e:'eeL-.3 like a -"I-:.-'1. fr ref these 1'easons,__l the sentence olfenee punielu.-Lble u11d.er... I.P.C. will have to be have been interfered with by n..: ":1 t .4 '1 u e r---er e mun witlieut. may e.:l-'"uat.e 1'-....="=..t..-":3 mn '' , "21- ~ 1:.

V feeult, 1 Tlte State appeal is l llle judgment of the lower appellate court insofar V' "'a~;:s1eduLi11g the sentence to 28 days of ilnprisomnent. for L1; e1,oe punishable under Section 304--A of the I.P.C. is gqnnvpungn is eoiieeﬁieii, mm 3 set. -wide are ;'i'"'*""" *""

h 1--- I sentence of six Inonths by tun:

ﬁx E:

E E:

E:

G0 stands restored and so also the fine: amount imposed by both the courts below for the oﬂ'em:c ptn1isl1z4:1}.;Ia{k1;1d¢:1' lull 304 A of -he 1.9.9. An w-out-us. -;;:os.o-.L;--a.é.-o»os_aos. %zo%-oo.

oilcliwas 3 co11cc:1'ucu, as me 1Q\VCl' a1;pEm:w§ mun. yea not interfered with the St"3fIt§?,:llC:_"t':;o : 'f.l'lf'$iVIAt:1' '. modifioalioln is roquin-zd _ A The 1't:spo11de__nI. ﬂS#JI'I1fJl1d!;'§l"' lxafore the iﬁai <:oi.i.i"L is' .x.:.. «.15 *;..'..:e DU .m'""=m,u-" u"":

by him and court also to secure £1.13 *s:1c.*€:_uesa_ces'i'VV1'o1' compliance of the Ol'(1t,2I"o"'J'.lA(.ﬁ)i\h'o. ér'esIm5i11g Lho stzuuzuoe of six 1:1-o11:11.:'~_: _.I;¢.-3.-_t+_:eL_i* ~l4.ry=.LlL. VI"_:'ri'__' t_:ou1'L.. fa I1'1*-- oi' ti

-.- _-._--....-.1 1... :1... I-..'.nI ..... -ul " U6 pi-usacu u_y um uuu uuun.

6' « zéeiitci 11;sLo1i§1i,..__1,.l_w l't:S'p0l1dGl1l is, however, entitled to ' Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. in respect of the A undergone by him.

'~ _ "A copy of this j-.::.!gm.;..;|. ... _. ==:

V' V. _ i"iJ11:i1with ﬁn' oompiianuc. 311

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court