YALLAPPA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED

24.06.2019 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE HAVERI IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 50/2017 AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.10.2017 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., HAVERI IN CC NO. 02/2014 OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 279, 337, 338 OF IPC AND U/SEC 134/(A)(B) R/W SEC. 187 AND 196 OF M.V. ACT. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:1241 CRL.RP No. 100464 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri Mallikarjun B. Madanalli, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader.

2. Accused who suffered an Order of conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 134(a), (b) r/w Sections 187 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, in C.C.No.2/2014 dated 27.10.2017 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Haveri, confirmed in Crl.A.No.50/2017 on the file of the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Haveri, is the revision petitioner.

3. Learned Trial Judge has sentenced the accused for the aforesaid offences, as under: “Acting under section 255(2) of Cr.P.C. accused person is convicted of the offences punishable under section 279, 337 and 338 of IPC and section 134(a), (b) R/w section187 and 196 of Motor Vehicles Act. The accused sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 month and shall pay penalty - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:1241 CRL.RP No. 100464 of 2025 HC-KAR Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under section 279 of IPC. In default, accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for further period of 15 days. The accused sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 month and shall pay penalty Rs.500/- for the offence punishable under section 337 of IPC. In default, accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for further period of 15 days. The accused sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and shall pay penalty Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under section 338 of IPC. In default, accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for further period of 1 month. Further accused is sentenced to pay penalty Rs.500/- for the offence punishable under section 134(a) and (b) R/w section 187 of Motor Vehicles Act. The accused person shall pay penalty Rs.2,000/- for the offence punishable under section 196 of Motor Vehicles Act. In default, accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days. Interim custody of the vehicle given to the RC owner is made absolute.”

4. At the out set, Sri Mallikarjun B. Madanalli, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend that there is not much - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:1241 CRL.RP No. 100464 of 2025 HC-KAR dispute as to the accident that has occurred. But, it was beyond human control and revision petitioner has already paid the compensation to the injured persons and is ready to pay additional fine amount part of which can be paid as compensation to injured. Therefore, custody period already undergone by the revision petitioner/accused may be treated as period of imprisonment for the proved offence.

5. Per contra, Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the revision grounds by contended that no lenience can be shown to people like revision petitioner who has driven the vehicle resulting in serious injuries to the injured persons in the accident and if any such lenience is shown, it would encourage similarly placed reckless drivers on the road and would encourage road rage and thus sought for dismissal of the revision petition.

6. If any such leniency is shown, it would encourage similarly placed reckless drivers on the road and would in turn promote incidents of road rage. Hence, this is a fit case for dismissal of the revision petition in toto. - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:1241 CRL.RP No. 100464 of 2025 HC-KAR

7. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court has meticulously perused the material on record. On such perusal of the material available on record, the negligent driving of the vehicle in question by the revision petitioner stands established by the oral as well as documentary evidence. The injured witnesses have identified the accused and have deposed before the Court in graphic detail about the incident that occurred on

19.10.2013 at about 12.30 p.m.

8. In fact, when there was grazing of the pedestrian near G.H. College, the accused, while proceeding from Hubli to Haveri, drove his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner, that too on the wrong side of the road.

9. Due to the impact of the accident, CW-5 sustained grievous injuries and the persons nearby shifted him to the hospital. These aspects of the matter are borne out not only by the oral testimony but also by the documentary evidence on record, namely the wound certificates marked at Exs.P4 and P5. - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:1241 CRL.RP No. 100464 of 2025 HC-KAR

10. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, the conviction recorded by the Courts below deserves to be sustained.

11. Having said so, it is also to be noticed that the accused was in custody for a period of two months and has no criminal antecedents. Taking note of these mitigating circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that by enhancing the fine amount to a sum of Rs.30,000/-, out of which a sum of Rs.25,000/- is to be paid as compensation to PW-3, the ends of justice would be met in the facts and circumstances of the case.

12. Accordingly, the following order: ORDER i. The revision petition is allowed in part. ii. The conviction of the accused for the aforesaid offences is maintained. iii. The period of custody already undergone by the revision petitioner shall be treated as the sentence of imprisonment for the said offences. iv. The accused shall pay an enhanced fine of Rs.30,000/- on or before 20.02.2026. - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:1241 CRL.RP No. 100464 of 2025 HC-KAR v. In default of payment of the said fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment as ordered by the trial Court. vi. Out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.25,000/- shall be paid to PW-3 as compensation under due identification. vii. The balance sum of Rs.5,000/- shall be appropriated towards defraying the expenses of the State. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm,AC CT:CMU LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 6