- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100255 OF 2017 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: BASAVARAJ GOVINDAPPA DAPPER AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC. LORRY DRIVER, R/O. WALMIKI NAGAR, GUTTAL, DIST. HAVERI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HAVERI TOWN P.S., REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(1) READ WITH 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT DATED 16.06.2017 BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE HAVERI IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 05 OF 2013 CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM HAVERI DATED 07.12.2012 IN CC.NO. 73 OF 2011 CINVICTING THE PETITIONER FOR UNDER SECTIONS 279, 337, 304-A OF IPC AND SECTIONS 181, 134(A)(B) READ WITH 187 OF M.V. ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY THE PETITIONER BE ACQUITTED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.04.08 11:08:22 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri Pruthvi K.S., learned counsel for revision petitioner and Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent. 2. Accused who suffered an order of conviction being the driver of the lorry bearing No.KA-27/A-1021 in C.C.No.73/2011 for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 304A, 337 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’), Section 3 read with Section 181 and 134(A) (B) read with Section 187 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 confirmed in Crl.A.No.5/2013 is the revision petitioner. 3. In the impugned judgment of the Trial Court, accused has been sentenced as under: Acting U/s 255(2) Cr.P.C., accused person is hereby convicted of the offences punishable U/s 279, 337, 304(A) of IPC, Section 3 R/W Section 181 and 134(A) (B) R/W 187 of MV Act. His Bail and surety bond stands cancelled. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 Accused shall pay fine of ₹800/- for the offence punishable U/s 279 of IPC, in default he shall undergo S.I., for a period of 3 months. Further, accused shall pay fine of ₹400/- for the offence punishable U/s 337 of IPC, in default he shall undergo S.I., for a period of 2 months. Further accused shall pay fine of ₹ 1,000/- and he shall undergo S.I., for a period of one year for the offence punishable U/s 304(A) of IPC. In case default of payment of fine he shall undergo further S.I., for a period of 3 months. Further accused shall pay fine of ₹ 500/- for the offence punishable U/s 3 R/W Section 181 of MV Act, in default he shall undergo S.I., for a period of 2 months. Accused shall also pay fine of ₹ 100/- each for the offences punishable U/s 134(A) & (B) R/W Section 187 of MV Act, in default he shall undergo S.I., for a period of 5 days each. Collect total fine amount of 2,900/- from the accused. In default he shall undergo S.I., for the aforesaid periods concurrently along with S.I., for a period of one year awarded to him for the offence punishable U/s 304(A) of IPC.” 4. Facts in brief which are upmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under: Haveri Town Police Station registered a case against the accused for the aforesaid offences based on a - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 complaint wherein it has been alleged that on 11.03.2011 at about 2.30 p.m. on Haveri-Hangal Road on NH-4 bye- pass bridge, accused being the driver of lorry bearing No.KA-27/A-1021 without having a valid driving licence, drove the said lorry in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the auto rickshaw bearing No.KA-30/6154 whereby the auto rickshaw toppled down and two inmates viz., Holibasappa S/o. Shivalingappa Angadi and Prema S/o. Shivayogeppa Kalappanavar died whereas other injured persons were shifted to the hospital for treatment. 5. Police, after thorough investigation, filed charge sheet against the accused. 6. After due trial, accused was convicted for the aforesaid offences and sentenced as referred to supra. 7. Being aggrieved by the same, accused preferred an appeal before the District Court in Crl. A. No.5/2013. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 8. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records from the Trial Court, heard the arguments of the parties in detail in the light of the appeal grounds and on re-appreciation of the material evidence on record, dismissed the appeal of the accused and confirmed the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Magistrate. 9. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court in this revision. 10. Sri Pruthvi K.S., learned counsel for revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition, vehemently contended that both the Courts have not properly appreciated the material on record and wrongly convicted the accused and sentenced as referred to supra resulting in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the revision petition. 11. Per contra, Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent supports the impugned judgments. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 12. Having heard the arguments of both the sides in detail, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 13. On such perusal of the material on record, following points would arise for consideration: 1) Whether the accused-revision petitioner makes out a case that the impugned judgments are suffering from legal infirmity and perversity and patent factual error thus calls for interference? 2) Whether the sentence needs modification? 3) What order? Regarding Point No.1 14. In the case on hand, accused was the driver of lorry bearing No.KA-27/A-1021 as on the date of accident is not in dispute. Admittedly, Holibasappa and Prema being the inmates of auto rickshaw died on account of accidental injuries. One of the injured persons by name Pradeep Kalappanavar is examined as PW-4. Complainant and PW-4 have supported the case of the prosecution in - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 toto. PW-9 being the son of Holibasappa also supported the case of the prosecution in part. 15. Taking note of the fact that accused did not possess the driving licence to drive the lorry as on the date of incident, negligence is established by the prosecution which is sufficient enough to maintain the conviction of the accused for the aforesaid offences. 16. Further, spot sketch and the photographs would corroborate the case of the prosecution in toto. 17. Accused has failed to offer his explanation while recording accused statement nor placed any defence evidence. 18. As such, following the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ravi Kapur Vs. State of Rajasthan1, this Court is of the considered opinion that the conviction of the accused for the aforesaid offences needs 1 (2012) 9 SCC 284 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 no interference that too in the revisional jurisdiction. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered in the negative. Regarding Point No.2. 19. In the case on hand, three persons are injured. One of them is PW-4. Admittedly, Holibasappa and Prema died on the spot. Taking note of two deaths and three persons being injured by a driver (accused) who did not hold a driving licence to drive the lorry, that too on the highway, this Court is of the considered opinion that the sentence needs no modification. Accordingly, point No.2 is answered in the negative. Regarding point No.3 : 20. In view of the findings of this Court on points No.1 and 2, as above, following order is passed. ORDER Criminal revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5807 CRL.RP No. 100255 of 2017 Time is granted for the accused to surrender before the Trial Court till 30.04.2025 for serving the remaining part of sentence. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE NAA CT:PA LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 31