Bangalore District Court
State By Kamakshipalya Traffic Police ... vs Chikkanarasihmaiah S/O Maregowda on 12 October, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
TRAFFIC COURT- II BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018
Present: Smt. Sharmila Kamath. K.
B.A.LLM
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Traffic Court-II, Bengaluru.
CC No. 13029/2017
Complainant: State by Kamakshipalya Traffic Police Station,
Bangalore.
Represented by: Sr. APP
V/s
Accused:- Chikkanarasihmaiah S/o Maregowda, 37 Yrs, R/at
No.7, 1st Main, Bhyaraveshvar Nagar, Sri Ram
Hospital, Sunkadakatte, Bengaluru.
Rider of Honda Active Scooter bearing Reg. No. KA
41 EA 9168
Represented by Sri. J.A, Adv.
1. Date of commission of offence: 26.9.2017
2. Offences alleged against accused : U/sec. 279, 337, 338 of IPC
and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of
IMV Act.
3. Date of recording of evidence: 24.09.2018
4. Date of Judgment: 12.10.2018.
JUDGMENT
The Sub-Inspector of Kamakshipalya Traffic P.S. has filed charge sheet against the accused for the 2 CC No. 13029/2017 offences punishable U/sec. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act.
2. The brief case of the prosecution is that;
On 26.9.2017 at about 11.50 a.m. the accused being the rider of Honda Activa bearing Reg. No. KA 41 EA 9168 rode the same on Nagarabhavi Ring Road from Magadi Road, Srigandakaval junction towards Nagarabhavi BDA Complex in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human life and dashed against Scooter bearing Reg. no. KA 02 JD 5769 of CW- 1/Jnanashekar which was taking "U" turn near Okkalingara Sanga School. Due to the impact, rider/CW-1 fell down and sustained simple and grievous injuries and after the accident the accused neither gave first aid to the injured nor informed the same to nearest police station. Thereby the accused has committed the offences punishable U/sec. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act.
3. Upon taking cognizance, case came to be registered against Accused for the offences punishable U/sec. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act. The Accused appeared before court engaged counsel and enlarged on bail. Charge sheet copies furnished to the Accused and thereby provision U/sec. 207 duly complied with.
3 CC No. 13029/20174. Plea came to be framed for the offence punishable U/sec. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act for which Accused pleaded not guilty claimed to be tried.
5. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined one witness as PW-1 and got exhibited document as per Ex.P.1. The learned counsel for the accused submitted no cross-examination of PW-1. Hence, cross-examination of PW-1 is taken as nil. Spot mahazar, Rough sketch, copy of notice u/sec.133, reply, Wound certificate, IMV report and FIR marked with consent as Exs.P.2 to 9. Inview of same, the learned Sr.APP given up the evidence of CWs.2 to 8.
6. Since, there was incriminating evidence, the statement of the accused U/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.
7. Heard on both sides.
8. The points that arise for my consideration are as follows:
1. Whether prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 26.9.2017 at about 11.50 a.m. the accused being the rider of Honda Activa bearing Reg. No. KA 41 EA 9168 rode the same on Nagarabhavi 4 CC No. 13029/2017 Ring Road from Magadi Road, Srigandakaval junction towards Nagarabhavi BDA Complex in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human life and thereby the accused person has committed the offences punishable U/sec. 279 of IPC?
2. Whether prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above date, time, the accused being the rider of Honda Activa bearing Reg. No. KA 41 EA 9168 dashed against Scooter bearing Reg. no. KA 02 JD 5769 of CW-1/Jnanashekar which was taking "U" turn near Okkalingara Sanga School and rider/CW-1 fell down and sustained simple and grievous injuries and thereby the accused has committed an offence punishable U/sec. 337 & 338 of IPC?
3. Whether prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that after the accident the accused neither gave first aid to the injured nor informed the same to nearest police station and thereby the accused has committed an offence punishable U/sec.134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act?
4. What Order?5 CC No. 13029/2017
9. Now, my findings to above points are as follows:
Point Nos.1 to 3: In the Affirmative Point No.4: As per order, for the following:
REASONS
10. Point Nos. 1 to 3 :- These points are taken together for discussion for the purpose of brevity and convenience.
It is well laid that in a criminal case the entire burden of proof rest upon the prosecution and the accused need prove nothing. Suffice for the accused to create doubt about the case of the prosecution and the reliability of the witnesses for prosecution. With this background, I proceed to discuss the evidence available on record.
11. It is the case of the prosecution that on 26.9.2017 at about 11.50 a.m. the accused being the rider of Honda Activa bearing Reg. No. KA 41 EA 9168 rode the same on Nagarabhavi Ring Road from Magadi Road, Srigandakaval junction towards Nagarabhavi BDA Complex in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger the human life and dashed against Scooter bearing Reg. no. KA 02 JD 5769 of CW-1/Jnanashekar which was taking "U" turn near Okkalingara Sanga School. Due to the impact, rider/CW-1 fell down and sustained simple and grievous injuries and after the accident the accused neither gave first aid to the injured 6 CC No. 13029/2017 nor informed the same to nearest police station. Thereby the accused has committed the offences punishable U/sec. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act.
12. To substantiate the case of the prosecution, the prosecution got examined CW-1 as PW-1 who is first informant and injured deposes that on 26.9.2017 at about 11.50 a.m. he was proceeding on his Honda Deo bearing Reg. no. KA 02 JB 5769 on Old ring road, from Magadi road near Okkaligara Sanga school while taking "U" turn, at that time the rider of Scooter bearing Reg. no. KA 41 EA 9168 came in high speed and negligent manner and dashed against him. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained injuries to his left leg and was shifted to hospital for treatment where he lodged first information statement as per Ex.P.1 before the police.
13. The learned counsel for the accused submits no cross-examination. Hence the cross-examination of these witnesses are taken as nil.
14. The learned counsel for the accused has not cross-examined the PW.1 and further submits that a lenient view may be taken against the accused person who is a poor person. As Exs.P.2 to P.9 marked with consent, the learned Sr. APP given up the evidence of CWs.2 to 8. It is pertinent to note that PW-1 is not cross 7 CC No. 13029/2017 examined. Hence, the version of PW-1 remained unchallenged.
15. Learned APP argued that accident was occurred only due to the fault of accused who drove the offending vehicle in rash and negligent manner. In that concern, PW-1 who is none other than the first informant and injured has supported the prosecution case. Therefore, he prays to convict the accused for the said offences.
16. 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 in the case on hand the prosecution fully depend upon the evidence of PW.1 who is none other than the first informant and injured who deposed about the accident. On the other hand the accused has not disputed the fact that he was the driver of the offending 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. As such it can be safely held 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 is of the considered view that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the offence punishable U/s. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a 8 CC No. 13029/2017 & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act. Hence point Nos.1 to 3 are answered in the AFFIRMATIVE.
17. Point No.4: In view of the discussions made by me in the above points, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Acting U/sec. 255(2) of Cr. P.C., the Accused is hereby Convicted for the offence punishable U/s. 279, 337, 338 of IPC and 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act.
The accused shall pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable U/sec. 279 of IPC and in default he shall undergo S.I. for a period of 15 days.
Further the accused shall pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence punishable U/sec. 337 of IPC and in default he shall undergo S.I. for a period of 15 days.
Further the accused shall pay a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence punishable U/sec. 338 of IPC and in default he shall undergo S.I. for a period of 15 days.
Further the accused shall pay a fine of Rs.1000/- for the offence punishable U/sec. 134 (a & b) r/w 187 of IMV Act and in default he shall undergo S.I. for a period of 15 days.
9 CC No. 13029/2017In total the accused shall pay fine of Rs. 3,500/- as a fine.
His bail bond stands cancelled after completion of appeal period.
(Dictated to the stenographer, directly on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of October 2018).
(Sharmila Kamath. K.) M.M.T.C-II, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for Prosecution:-
PW-1 Jnaneshekar List of documents marked for Prosecution:
Ex.P.1: First information statement Ex.P.2 Spot mahazar Ex.P.3 Rough sketch Ex.P.4 Copy of 133 notice Ex.P.5 Reply Ex.P.6 Wound certificate Exs.P.7 & 8 IMV reports Ex.P.9 FIR M.M.T.C-II, Bengaluru.