Criminal Appeal No. 1231 of 2020 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5553 CRL.A No. 1231 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1231 OF 2020 (A) BETWEEN: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOLLEGALA RURAL POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001. (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI.K HCGP) AND: …APPELLANT Digitally signed by MAYAGAIAH VINUTHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA SHIVANNA @ SHIVANANDA S/O SOMACHAR AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OCC: K.S.R.T.C BUS DRIVER, BADGE NO.518, K.R NAGAR, K.S.R.T.C STAGE, R/O KUPPE VILLAGE, K.R. NAGAR TALUK PRESENTLY R/A KANAKA NAGAR K.R NAGAR, K.R NAGAR TOWN-571 602. …RESPONDENT
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. SHIVANNA @ SHIVANANDA, ADVOCATE-ABSENT SERVED) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) AND (3) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 04.07.2019 PASSED IN C.C.NO.137/2016 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5553 CRL.A No. 1231 of 2020 AND I J.M.F.C., KOLLEGALA IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 279 AND 338 OF IPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT Though this matter is listed for admission, it is taken up for final disposal by perusing the evidence and documents submitted by the Learned HCGP. 2. The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in C.C.No.137/2016 dated 04.07.2019 by the Principal Civil Judge and I JMFC at Kollegala (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court'), wherein the Trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of IPC. 3. The factual matrix of the prosecution case in brief is that: On 23.10.2015, PW.1-complianant along with her family members was traveling from Kollegala to Male Mahadeshwara Betta by KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-09-F-4735. She was - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5553 CRL.A No. 1231 of 2020 seated on the rear of the said bus. At about 8.45 A.M in the morning, near the main road of Singanalluru Bus stand, the driver of the said bus i.e., respondent herein drove the bus with utmost negligence while crossing the road hump. Owing to this, the complainant sustained injuries and was unconscious for some time. Hence, she lodged the complaint against the accused/respondent on 25.10.2015 before the Kollegala Rural Police as per Ex.P1. On the strength of Ex.P1, Kollegala Rural Police registered a case against the accused in Cr.No.222/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC. Thereafter, the police investigated the case and laid the charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of IPC. 4. In order to prove the charges leveled against the accused before the Trial Court, the prosecution in total examined seven witnesses as PW.1 to PW.7 and marked eight documents as Exs.P1 to P8. 5. On assessment of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court acquitted the accused for the charges - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5553 CRL.A No. 1231 of 2020 leveled against him. The said judgment is challenged by the State in this appeal. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned HCGP Sri. Rahul Rai.K., for the appellant and perused the materials on record. 7. The primary contention of the learned HCGP is that the Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence available on record in right perspective. He contended that the Trial Court has not considered the evidence of PW.1-complianant so also PW.2-eyewitness to the incident. Both these witnesses have categorically deposed that due to rash and negligent driving of the accused, PW.1 sustained injuries on her back. He further contended that PW.1 has lodged the complaint-Ex.P1 soon after the incident and a spot mahazar was also drawn by the Investigating Officer-PW.6 as per Ex.P2. In such circumstances, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused. Accordingly, he prays to set-aside the appeal by convicting the appellant for the offences he has charged. 8. Having heard the learned HCGP for the appellant, the sole point that arise for my consideration is: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5553 CRL.A No. 1231 of 2020 "Whether the Trial Court is justified in acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of IPC and whether any interference is required in the impugned judgment? 9. On careful examination of the evidence of PW.1- injured in this case, she has categorically stated that on the date of incident, she was traveling by bus from Kollegala to Male Mahadeshwara Betta and owing to the negligent driving of the accused, she sustained injuries on her back. However, on perusal of Ex.P1-complaint and in her evidence, she herself admitted that while crossing the road hump, she sustained such injuries. Further, she has not stated in her evidence that the accused was driving the bus in a rash and negligent manner that too while crossing the hump. In such circumstances, the ingredients of Sections 279 and 338 of IPC do not attract to the case on hand. Though PW.2 and PW.3 are the co-passengers, they are none other than the relatives of PW.1. On perusal of their evidence also, they categorically admitted that PW.1 has sustained such injuries while crossing the road hump. Further they failed to state that the accused was driving the bus in a rash and negligent manner at the time of crossing the road hump. Admittedly, they were traveling from Kollegala to Male - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5553 CRL.A No. 1231 of 2020 Mahadeshwara Betta on a curved road. In such circumstances, the Trial Court has appreciated the evidence on record in right perspective and the impugned judgment passed by the Trial Court does not call for any interference. In that view of the matter, I answer the point raised above in the negative and proceed to pass the following:
Decision
ORDER i) The appeal filed by the State is dismissed being devoid of merits. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11