- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 200032 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SHIVAPUTRA S/O PANDIT SINDE @ SINGE, AGE:34 YEARS, OCC: CRUISER JEEP DRIVER, R/O. MOLKERA, TQ. HUMNABAD, DIST. BIDAR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MARTHANDAPPA MALLESHAPPA ALLUR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE THROUGH, KAMALAPUR P.S., TQ. KAMALAPUR, DIST. KALABURAGI, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH-585107. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA YADAV, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W SEC. 401 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION U/SEC. 397 AND 401 OF CR.PC FILED BY THE REVISION PETITIONER AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.01.2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE III ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT KALABURAGI, IN CRL. APPEAL NO.11/2019 AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 29.01.2019 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT KALABURAGI IN C.C. NO. 1140/2013 AND ACQUIT THE Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 PETITIONER / ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 279, 337, 338, 304(A) OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. This revision petition is filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.01.2010 in C.C. No.1140/2013 passed by the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Kalaburagi and its confirmation order dated 07.01.2021 in Crl.A.No.11/2019 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi. 2. The ranks of the parties in the Trial Court will be considered henceforth for convenience. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 06.02.2012 at about 7.00 a.m., the SHO of Kamalapur Police Station received an information regarding the accident stated to have taken place on Humnabad National Highway -218. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 On receiving the said information, the respondent - police visited the spot and found that the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No.KA-29-M-2866 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to a mile stone erected on the roadside. Consequently, it has turned turtle. Due to the said accident, one of the inmates, namely, Rukmini died on the spot and others, namely, CWs.7 and 10 sustained grievous injuries. Similarly, CWs.1 to 6, 8 and 11 had also sustained simple injuries. In addition to that, one Ambadas Kulkarni was also severely injured, later, he died in the hospital. The respondent- police received a complaint by CW.1 and registered a case for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). After conducting investigation, submitted the charge sheet. 4. To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses as PWs.1 to 14 and got marked 30 documents as Exs.P1 to P30. The Trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 record, recorded the conviction for the offences stated supra. The Appellate Court confirmed the same. 5. Heard Sri.Masthandappa Malleshappa Allur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Gopal Krishna Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State. 6. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the accused that the findings of the Courts below in recording the conviction are perverse and illegal and also against the evidence on record. 7. It is further submitted that there is no dispute in respect of the accident. However, as per the identity of the accused is concerned, none of the witnesses have spoken about the identity of the driver of the vehicle. When the identity of the driver has not been proved, recording the conviction would not be proper. 8. It is further submitted that, on reading the evidence of all the witnesses, none of the witnesses have spoken about the rash and negligent driving. In the absence of evidence regarding rash and negligent driving, conviction ought not - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 to have been recorded on the said provisions. Having said thus, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 9. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State vehemently contended and justified the concurrent findings. He further submitted that the evidence of the witnesses would indicate that the driver had driven the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. The manner in which the accident had taken place would indicate that the petitioner has driven the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. Consequently, the vehicle dashed to the roadside stone laid for protection of the vehicles. The theory of res ipsa loquitur is applicable to the case. The Courts below have concurrently appreciated and held that the petitioner has committed the offences as stated supra. Therefore, interference with the said findings is not necessary. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the respondent prays to reject the petition. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the findings of the Courts below - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 in recording the conviction, it appears from the record that P.W.1 is an injured and one of the inmates of the vehicle in which he was traveling on 05.02.2012. He deposed that, on 05.02.2012, P.Ws.1, 3 to 11, deceased Rukmini and Ambadas were returning from Kutakur village, Andhra Pradesh after attending the engagement function of CW.13 in a Cruiser vehicle bearing its registration No.KA-29-M- 2866. When they reached near Kamalapura, Chindi Basavanna Temple, at about 4.30 a.m., the driver/accused drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the roadside milestone, due to which, the vehicle turned turtle, consequently, some of the inmates have sustained grievous injuries and two of them have died. 11. P.W.1 supported the case of the prosecution. P.W.8 being the owner of the vehicle, admitted in the examination-in- chief that he was the owner of the vehicle bearing No.KA- 29-M-2866 and the accused was driving the said vehicle on the date of the accident. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2435 CRL.RP No. 200032 of 2022 12. Be that as it may, the way in which the accident had taken place would indicate that the driver was not only driving the said vehicle with high speed, but also in a rash and negligent manner. The theory of res ipsa loquitur is squarely applicable to the case on hand. Therefore, the findings of the Courts below in recording the conviction are proper and appropriate and there are no grounds to interfere with the said findings. 13. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SRT/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31 CT:PK