- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100086 OF 2019 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: YAMANAPPA @ YAMUNAPPA S/O. AYAPPA, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O AT: BANNAIGDAD CAMP, GANGAVATI, TQ: GANGAVATI, DIST: KOPPAL. &PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDAPPA S.SAJJAN, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH, THROUGH THE ANIGERI POLICE STATION. &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2018 IN CRL.A.NO.51/2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, BY CONFIRMING THE ORDER IN C.C.NO.42/2011 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE JMFC COURT, NAVALAGUND AND QUASH THE COMPLAINT, FIR AND CHARGE SHEET BY ACQUITTING THE PETITIONER, FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 279, 337, 338, AND 304(A) OF IPC., IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC.,. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND) Heard Sri Siddappa S. Sajjan, learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State. 2. The present criminal revision petition is filed challenging the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 24.03.2018 passed in C.C.No.42/2011 by the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalgund (for short 8the trial Court9), and the judgment dated 30.11.2018 passed in Criminal Appeal No.51/2018 by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad (for short 8the appellate Court9). 3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 12.05.2010, the deceased, Mohammadrafiq, along with his brother Altafhussain, had been to Gangavathi for loading Rice Bags into the lorry bearing registration No.KA-26/4170 and was proceeding towards Hubli for unloading the consignment at Goa. The complainant is the father of the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that when the lorry driven by the deceased had crossed Aarer Bridge near Bhadrapur village, a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 lorry bearing registration No.KA-37/4433, driven by the accused in a rash and negligent manner, came from the opposite direction and caused the accident. Mohammadrafiq, the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-26/4170, succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment at the hospital. 4. After investigation, the charge sheet against the accused came to be filed for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC'). 5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 09 witnesses as PWs.1 to 9 and marked 11 documents as Exhibits P1 to P11. The trial Court recorded the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, wherein the accused denied the allegations made by the prosecution. 6. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution, the trial Court convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 337, 338, and 304-A of IPC. The accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months each for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of IPC and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 279 and Rs.500/- for offence under Section 338 of IPC, and one year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 304-A of IPC and Additionally, a fine of Rs.500/- was imposed for the offence under Section 337 of IPC. 7. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial Court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.51/2018. The appellate Court, on re-appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 24.03.2018 passed by the trial Court. 8. Sri Siddappa S. Sajjan, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, submits that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is insufficient to establish the guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. It is contended that PWs.3 and 4 are interested witnesses; PW.3, though examined as an - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 eyewitness, was not present at the scene at the time of the incident, and PW.4 is stated to be an inmate of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-26/4170. The trial Court, it is submitted, has not properly appreciated the evidence available on record. The findings recorded by both the trial Court and the appellate Court are, therefore, contrary to the evidence on record. It is further contended that the accused was neither rash nor negligent and that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the victim3deceased, who was driving the offending lorry. Learned counsel also submits that the sentence imposed is excessive and not commensurate with the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. Per contra, Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State, submits that both the Courts, upon proper appreciation of the evidence on record, have rightly concluded the guilt of the accused for the offences charged. It is contended that the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below are based on the cogent and reliable evidence adduced by the prosecution. As there are no infirmities or perversities in the orders - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 impugned, the revision petition, it is submitted, is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed. 10. Considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. 11. The factum of the accident involving lorries bearing registration Nos. KA-26/4170 and KA-37/4433 are not in dispute. Likewise, the death of one Mohammadrafiq as a result of grievous injuries sustained in the said accident is also undisputed. The post-mortem report marked at Ex.P9 establishes that the cause of death was the injuries sustained in the accident. PWs.1 and 2 are the spot mahazar witnesses, while PWs.3 and 4 have been examined as eyewitnesses. Both witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. PW.3 has given a detailed and consistent account of the incident, and his testimony finds corroboration in Ex.P2. Even upon cross- examination by the defence, the testimony of PW.3 has remained unshaken and inspires confidence. 12. PW.4 has been examined as an eyewitness and has deposed to having witnessed the accident. His testimony clearly - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 indicates that the accused was driving the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and that the accident occurred solely due to such rash and negligent driving. PW.7, the Motor Vehicle Inspector, has spoken to the damage caused to the vehicles as reflected in Ex.P5, which corroborates the occurrence of the accident. PW.6, the Medical Officer, is the author of the post- mortem report marked as Ex.P4. The cumulative consideration of the evidence of the aforementioned witnesses firmly and conclusively establishes the negligence of the accused in causing the accident which resulted in the death of Mohammadrafiq. Both the trial Court and the appellate Court have rightly recorded the finding of guilt against the accused based on the material on record. 13. Having held that the accused is guilty of the offences charged, the next issue that requires consideration is the correctness of the sentence imposed. The trial Court sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months each for the charged offences and to pay fine. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 14. It is brought to the notice of the Court that the accident in question occurred in the year 2010. As on the date of the incident, the accused was aged about 23 years. It is further submitted that the accused is the sole breadwinner of his family, and that his wife and children are entirely dependent on his earnings for their livelihood. 15. Having regard to the year of the accident, i.e., 2010, the age of the accused at the time of the incident, and his present family circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that sentencing the accused to undergo imprisonment at this stage would cause undue hardship to the dependent family members. If the sentence of imprisonment is substituted with a fine, and such fine is directed to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased Mohammadrafiq, it may not entirely alleviate the hardship caused, but would, to some extent, mitigate it. Hence, this Court is inclined to modify the sentence. 16. In light of the above findings and observations, the following: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 ORDER i. Criminal Revision Petition is allowed-in-part. ii. The judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalgund in C.C.No.42/2011 dated 24.03.2018 and further confirmed by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad in Criminal Appeal No.51/2018 dated 30.11.2018, is hereby confirmed to the extent of recording conviction. iii. The sentence imposed to undergo imprisonment is modified, substituting with fine amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. iv. One month time is granted to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court. In default of payment of fine amount, the accused-petitioner shall undergo imprisonment as ordered by the Trial Court. v. The trial Court shall disburse the fine amount electronically in favour of the legal heirs of the deceased Mohammadrafiz, on proper identification. vi. Bail bonds if any, shall stands cancelled. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7850 CRL.RP No. 100086 of 2019 Registry to return the trial Court records along with copy of this order for compliance. Sd/- (K V ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15