- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 200064 OF 2020 BETWEEN: MOHD NASEER S/O MOHD BABUMIYAN, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. ALIPUR, TQ. ZAHEERABAD, DIST. BIDAR-584101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHAITANYAKUMAR CHANDRIKI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE TRAFFIC POLICE, HUMNABAD, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH-585102. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.10.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HUMNABAD IN C.C.NO.173/2015 AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BIDAR, (SITTING AT BASAVAKALYAN) IN CRL.APPEAL NO.88/2018, CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO ACQUIT THE PETITIONER FROM THE ALLEGED OFFENCES. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.10.2018 in C.C.No.173/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Humnabad and its confirmation judgment and order dated 31.08.2020 in Crl.A.No.88/2018 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bidar (Sitting at Basavakalyan), wherein both the Courts have recorded the conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 338 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) r/w Section 187 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘IMV Act’). 2. The ranking of the parties in the Trial Court, henceforth will be considered as per their rankings in the Court for convenience. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 Factual matrix of the case: 3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 27.09.2014, the rider of the motorcycle bearing its registration No.KA-39- K-4281 had been to Allura Village to bring Mallikarjuna and Nandish. When he was coming along with them on his motorcycle in the National Highway No.9, he stopped the motorcycle to attend the nature call near Hudagi Shivara Bhagirathi agricultural land, at that time, Tempo bearing its registration No.AP-22-DW-4617 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle. Consequently, the rider, namely, Prabhu, CW.1-Nandish and Mallikarjuna sustained injuries; Prabhu sustained head injuries and also injuries to his leg and died at the spot, CW.1 sustained simple injuries and Mallikarjuna S/o Ningappa sustained grievous injuries. Mallikarjuna died while shifting to the hospital. Based on the complaint, the respondent police have registered a case in Crime No.151/2014 for the offences stated supra. 4. To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined in all 5 witnesses as PWs.1 to 5 and got - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 marked 19 documents as Exs.P1 to P19. The Trial Court rendered the conviction for the offences stated supra and the same was confirmed by the Appellate Court. Being aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Courts below, the petitioner is before this Court. 5. Heard Sri.Chaitanyakumar Chandriki, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State. 6. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that, both the Courts have committed an error in arriving at a conclusion that the petitioner had committed the offences as stated supra and the findings given by both the Courts are not in consonance with the evidence and facts of the case. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. 7. It is further submitted that the identity of the driver of the vehicle has not been proved properly. As per the case of the prosecution, there were three members who were moving on the motorcycle. They stopped the vehicle to attend the nature call. Such being the fact, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 causing accident and injures to all the three members at a time cannot be believed. The Appellate Court also failed to appreciate the findings properly and passed the impugned order, which are required to be set aside. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 8. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State vehemently justified the concurrent findings of the Courts below and he further submitted that the findings of the Courts below are proper and appropriate. PW.2 had also sustained injuries in the said incident and he identified the petitioner, who was the driver of the said vehicle. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the findings of the Courts below. Moreover, two persons have died in the said incident. Hence, the findings of the Trial Court and the Appellate Court are required to be upheld. Making such submissions, the learned HCGP for the respondent – State prays to dismiss the petition. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the findings of the Courts below in recording the conviction, the fact remains that, three persons were proceeding on the motorcycle as triple rider. The rider of the bike had stopped the bike to attend the nature call. In the meantime, the vehicle was parked on the road. The petitioner, who was driving his Eicher Tempo, dashed to the scooter and caused injuries to all the three persons. Out of the three persons, two persons died and one of the person has been examined as PW.2. 10. The evidence of PW.2 would indicate that the incident had occurred on 27.09.2014. The accused was arrested on 01.10.2014. The name of the petitioner had not been mentioned in the complaint. Even assuming that the incident had occurred and PW.2 had sustained injuries in the said accident, it would be difficult for him to identify the accused / petitioner without conducting identification parade. Moreover, the description of the petitioner had not been mentioned in the complaint. Such being the fact, causing accident by the petitioner and he is responsible for the death of two persons in the accident, - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2124 CRL.RP No. 200064 of 2020 in my considered view, it appears to be unnatural and not acceptable. 11. Therefore, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The criminal revision petition is allowed. (ii) The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.10.2018 passed in C.C.No.173/2015 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Humnabad and the judgment and order dated 31.08.2020 passed in Crl.A. No.88/2018 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bidar (Sitting at Basavakalyan) are set aside. (iii) The petitioner is acquitted for the offences under Sections 279, 338, 304-A and Section 187 of IMV Act. (iv) Bail bonds executed, if any, stand cancelled. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE SRT/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29 CT:PK