- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.760 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SRI. VEERENDRA S/O. SRI LAKSHMANA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOSAMANE, KOWKRADY VILLAGE, NELYADY POST, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-574 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI K THARANATH SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE REPRESENTED BY P.S.I, PUTTUR TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, PUTTUR, D.K. DISTRICT-574 201. REPRESENTED BY S.P.P HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 23.03.2019 PASSED BY THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU, SITTING AT PUTTUR IN CRL.A.No.5039/2018 AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 28.08.2018 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND A.C.J.M., PUTTUR, D.K. IN C.C.No.414/2014 BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP. Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 23.03.2019 passed in Crl.A.No.5039/2018 by V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, where under the judgment of conviction dated 28.08.2018, passed in C.C.No.414/2014 by Principal Senior Civil Judge and ACJM., Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, convicting the petitioner for the offences under Sections 279, 338 and 304(A) of IPC and sentence passed thereon has been affirmed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent/State. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 09.04.2012 at about 4.35 p.m., at Parakala, near Shirady, Puttur Taluk, the petitioner/accused being the driver of the Jeep bearing registration No.K.A.21-M-1394 has taken the same towards backside on National Highway 75 in a rash and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 negligent manner without giving any signal and back portion of the Jeep dashed to the Motorcycle bearing registration No.K.A.21-J-3639 which was riding by P.W.2 - Ananda Gowda. Due to the said accident, P.W.2 - Ananda Gowda fell down along with his Motorcycle with his wife Smt. Girija and their son Praneeth, aged 5 years who were pillion riders and he sustained severe injuries and while carrying them to hospital for treatment, the said Girija died near the hospital. 4. P.W.1 has filed complaint in that regard. The police after investigation filed charge sheet against the petitioner for the offences under Section 279, 338 and 304-A of IPC. 5. In order to prove the charge, the prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.21. The statement of the accused has been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The Trial Court after hearing arguments on both sides has convicted the petitioner for the said offences and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days and fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 279 IPC; to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days and fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 338 IPC and to undergo - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 simple imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 304(A) of IPC. 6. The petitioner/accused challenged the said judgment of conviction before the Sessions Court in Crl.A.No.5039/2018. The said appeal came to be dismissed on merits affirming the judgment of conviction, order of sentence passed by the Trial Court. The present revision petition is filed challenging the said judgments. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that as per case of prosecution the alleged accident has occurred when the petitioner/accused took his Jeep on reverse and dashed to the Motorcycle of P.W.2, which was coming from its hind side. 8. He submits that road leading from Bengaluru to Mangaluru is having slope and both Jeep and the bike were moving from Bengaluru side towards Mangaluru side on a slope road. He further submits that evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 indicate that Jeep driven by the petitioner/accused was stopped for alighting the passengers in it and the driver took Jeep on - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 reverse and dashed to the motorcycle of P.W.2 and he drove the Jeep on reverse without giving any signal. 9. He submits that the road from Mangaluru towards Bengaluru is having up and if a Jeep is taken reverse on up road, it would not be having any speed, rather the bike which was driven from Bengaluru to Mangaluru side was coming on a slope road in a speed and that might have dashed to the Jeep which was stopped to alight passengers. He submits that what was the speed of the Jeep when it took the reverse has not been stated by any of witnesses. P.W.1 has admitted in the cross-examination that Jeep was stopped on mud road that itself indicate that it was not on the main road. He submits that in order to claim compensation, a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. He submits that there is a discrepancy with respect to the place of spot in the evidence of P.W.3 and other witnesses. Without considering all these aspects learned Magistrate has erred in convicting the petitioner and learned Sessions Judge has erred in affirming the said conviction passed by the Trial Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 10. Learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that P.Ws.1 and 3 are eye witnesses to the incident and P.W.2 is a rider of the bike who has sustained injury in the accident. Evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 clearly establish the rash and negligent driving of the Jeep by the accused. There was no any mechanical defect as per Motor Vehicle Report, issued by P.W.7 as per Ex.P.15. There is a death of wife of P.W.2 in the accident and injury to P.W.2 and his minor child. Considering all these aspects, the Trial Court has rightly convicted the petitioner for the said offences and Appellate Court rightly re- appreciating the evidence on record, has affirmed the conviction passed by the Trial Court. 11. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader, this Court perused the impugned judgments and records of the Appellate Court and Trial Court. 12. Ex.P.11 is the sketch of the scene of offence. The accident has occurred on the road leading from Bengaluru towards Mangaluru on left side. As per the evidence P.W.1 to 3, P.W.2 was riding his bike from Mangaluru side towards - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 Bengaluru side on National Highway - 75 and the petitioner/accused took reverse of his Jeep and dashed to the bike of P.W.2. 13. P.W.3 in his cross-examination has stated that road from Bengaluru towards Mangaluru is having slope. P.W.2 was riding his motorcycle on slope road. Petitioner/accused was a driver of the Jeep had stopped his Jeep for alighting passengers and he took reverse of his vehicle and said to have dashed to the Motorcycle of P.W.2. When accused was taking his Jeep on reverse side, it is up, since the road from Mangaluru to Bengaluru is having up. As the petitioner/accused has taken his Jeep on reverse side, it cannot be said that he was taking his Jeep in reverse in high speed as the road is up. The rider of the bike - P.W.2 was riding his bike having a minor child and wife as a pillion riders on slope road and bike dashed to the Jeep. 14. P.W.1 has stated that he was behind of P.W.2 and his speed was 30 kms. P.W.1 has stated that Jeep was stopped on the mud road. P.W.2 who was riding his bike on a slope road would easily see the Jeep, if it comes on reverse and he - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 can stop his motorcycle. It is natural that a bike going on a slope road will be in speed. Even if the petitioner/accused has driven his Jeep on reverse without giving any signal, it cannot be said that he has driven his Jeep in a rash and negligent manner, since the road is up on the reverse side of the Jeep and road is slope for the bike rider. 15. Considering all these aspects, the evidence on record will not establish that the petitioner driven his Jeep in a rash and negligent manner. Without appreciating all these, the Trial Court has erred in convicting the petitioner and Appellate Court has also erred in affirming the conviction passed by the Trial Court. The petitioner has made out case for allowing this revision petition and acquitting him for offences under Section 279, 338 and 304(A) IPC. In the result following: ORDER (i) The revision petition is allowed. (ii) The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in C.C.No.414/2014 dated 28.08.2018 convicting the petitioner for offences - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24252 CRL.RP No. 760 of 2019 under Sections 279, 338, 304-A IPC and sentence thereon is set aside. (iii) The judgment dated 23.03.2019 passed in Crl.A.No.5039/2018 by V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, affirming the judgment of conviction passed in C.C.No.414/2014 is set aside. (iv) The petitioner is acquitted for offences under Sections 279, 338 and 304-A IPC. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE MR