Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka vs Akshaya on 7 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673
CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100191 OF 2017 (A)
BETWEEN:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH CPI, HONAVAR CIRCLE,
HONAVAR, REPRESENTED BY
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MADANMOHAN M.KHANNUR, AGA)
AND:
AKSHAYA S/O. DHARMA NAIK,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: HOOTAN, JANMANE, HUNASEKOPPA,
TALUK SIRSI, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR S.BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by VINAYAKA B V THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378 (1)
Location: HIGH AND (3) OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST
COURT OF THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 04.10.2016
KARNATAKA
PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C, HONAVAR, AT
HONAVAR IN C.C.NO.43/2016 (OLD NO.319/2015) AND TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED
04.10.2016 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.,
HONAVAR AT HONAVAR IN C.C.NO. 43/2016 (OLD NO. 319 OF 2015)
AND TO CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE RESPONDENT/ ACCUSED FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 279, 337, 304(A) OF
IPC AND SEC. 3(1) R/W. 181 AND SEC. 146 R/W. SEC. 196 OF
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AND ETC.,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673
CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 04.10.2016 passed in C.C.No.43/2016 (Old No.319/2015) by the learned Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Honavar (for short, 'trial Court').
2. Parties are referred to as per their rankings before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience.
3. Brief relevant facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 20.04.2015 CW1-Nagaraj Ramachandra Madiwal and another Shripad Ganesh Madiwal had come to Honavar and while they were walking by the side of National Highway No.66 and proceeding towards Sharavati Circle, Honavar town, at that time, a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-47/E-8390 driven by the accused came from hind side in a rash and negligent manner and hit to Shripad Madiwal thereby, caused the accident. Due to said accident, Shripad Madiwal fell down on the tar road, sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the said injuries while he was being taken to the hospital. Same -3- NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673 CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017 was informed to the Police and a complaint was registered in Crime No.86/2015 against the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC and after thorough investigation, chargesheet is filed against the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A and 337 of IPC.
4. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined 11 witnesses as PW1 to PW11 and got marked 15 documents as Exs.P1 to P15. On closure of prosecution side evidence, a statement was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has not led any defence evidence on his behalf, but, during the course of cross-examination, one document came to be marked as Ex.D1 on behalf of the accused. On hearing the arguments on both the sides, the trial Court acquitted the accused. Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the State has preferred this appeal.
5. Heard Sri. Madanmohan M.Khannur, learned AGA for the appellant-State and Sri.Shivakumar S.Badawadagi, learned counsel for the respondent-accused. -4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673 CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017
6. Learned AGA for the appellant-State would submit that the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court is contrary to law, facts and evidence on record. Learned AGA submits that PW1-complainant, PW2-injured pillion rider and PW5-eyewitness have specifically deposed as to the rash and negligent driving of the accused who caused the accident. He submits that the defence has not elicited anything in the cross-examination of PWs.1, 2 and 5 to disbelieve their evidence, but, the trial Court has not properly appreciated these witnesses and committed grave error in passing the judgment and order of acquittal. Further, learned AGA would submit that in Ex.P2-Spot Panchanama and Ex.P.3-Spot Sketch Map there were no brake marks to show as to the break marks or tire marks were found for having stopped the vehicle immediately to avoid the accident by the accused. He submits that, the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court suffers from legal infirmity and the same requires to be re-appreciated. On all these grounds, he prays for allowing the appeal.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-accused would submit that the trial Court has -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673 CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017 properly appreciated the evidence placed on record in accordance with law and facts, which needs no interference and prays for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Having heard the arguments of both the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, the following point would arise for consideration:
Whether the prosecution has made out any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment of acquittal?
9. My answer to the above point is in the negative for the following:
REASONS
10. I have examined the appeal papers and trial Court records placed on record. It is the case of the prosecution that on 20.04.2015 Shripad Ganesh Madiwal met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving by the driver-accused of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-47/E-8390 which resulted in an accidental death of Shripad Madiwal. Case was registered and after thorough investigation, chargesheet was filed against the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A and 337 of IPC. The accused pleaded -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673 CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017 not guilty before the trial Court. On hearing the arguments on both the sides, the trial Court acquitted the accused. Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the State has preferred this appeal.
11. As could be seen from the chargesheet that PW1- Nagaraj Ramachandra Madiwal is a complainant and CW6- Darshan Mohan Naik said to be an eyewitness who is examined as PW2 have not supported the case of the prosecution. CW4- Sri.Govind Amkusa Gowda examined as PW3 and CW-5-Arun Krishna Pulkar examined as PW4, said to be the attesters to the Mahazar have deposed to the Mahazar conducted by the Police as per Exs.P2 and P3. CW7- Chandrashekar Venkatraman Naik examined as PW5 and CW8-Shrikant Ganesh Madival examined as PW6 are not the eyewitnesses, but they are hear say witnesses. CW11-Keshav Manjunath Toudel examined as PW7 has deposed as to the notice issued by the Police as per Ex.P11 and also given reply as per Ex.P.12. CW17-Parameshwar Ramu Gunag examined as PW8-Police Officer has deposed his part of investigation. CW-10-Keshal Vitthal Naik examined as PW9 who is also hear say witness has not supported the case of the prosecution. CW16-Smt.Savitri Anandu Nayak examined as -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673 CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017 PW10 and CW18-Manjunath M examined as PW11, said to be Investigating Officers have deposed as to their respective investigation.
12. In para Nos.15 to 17 of the impugned judgment, the trial Court has observed as under:
"15. ..., the Spot Panchanama shows that the accident has taken place 3 feet inside the tar road but the evidence of PWs-1 and 5 is that the accident has taken place in the kaccha portion of the road. The evidence of Spot Panchanama and Spot Sketch witnesses also show that the accident has taken place well inside the tar road. It is the specific case of the accused that the accident has taken place when the deceased suddenly crossed the road. In his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. also he has stated the same. The pillion rider of the Motor Cycle i.e., PW-2 has supported the version of the accused. PW-8 Parameshwar Rama Gunaga the Investigating Officer who has prepared Spot Panchanama and Sketch has stated that the complainant has shown the spot as 4 feet from the southern edge of the National Highway towards northern side. Therefore, the evidence clearly shows that the accident has taken place well inside the tar road on the left side of the National Highway leading from Gerusoppa Circle towards Sharavati Circle in Honavar town. Though in the complaint it has been stated that after the incident the deceased thrown to the tar road, there is no evidence to support the same.
16. PW-5 has stated in his evidence that at the time of the accident he was waiting for a Bus to go to Manki. Further, he has stated that if one stands near the place in the Bus Stop to go to Manki, the place of accident is not visible. Again he has stated that he was standing behind the Rickshaw Stand. From the evidence of PW-5 doubt arises as to whether he has witnessed the accident.-8-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7673 CRL.A No. 100191 of 2017
17. Considering the evidence available on record, a doubt arises regarding the Prosecution case as to whether the accident has taken place due to the negligence of the rider of the Motor Cycle i.e., the accused. The doubt arises as to whether the accident has taken place when the deceased walking on the kaccha portion of the road or while he was suddenly crossing the road. Therefore, the Prosecution has failed to prove that the accident has taken place due to the negligence of the accused and in the said accident he caused simple injuries to PW-2 and caused the death of deceased Shripad. Accordingly, I answer point no.1 in the negative."
13. On re-appreciation/re-examination of evidence placed on record, I do not find any acceptable material or legal evidence to prove the essential ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304A and 337 of IPC. The trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence placed on record in accordance with law and facts. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court. Hence, the above point is answered in the negative and accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE RH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24