- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100089 OF 2020 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: BASAVARAJ S/O. THIPPANNA HOSAMANI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF NEKRTC, BALLARI 1ST DEPOT, R/O: SULKERE, BADAMI TALUKA, BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANAND R.KOLLI, ADVOCATE AND SRI. PRAVEENKUMAR G., ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD, THROUGH GANGAVATHI RURAL POLICE STATION-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W SEC.401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS OF CONVICTION DATED 27.08.2015 IN C.C. NO.198/2015 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. AT GANGAVATHI AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.37/2015 DATED 30.08.2019 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOPPAL FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 279, 338 OF IPC ONLY IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER/ACCUSED IS CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY 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:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND) Heard Sri Anand R. Kolli, learned counsel along with Sri Praveen Kumar G., learned counsel for the petitioner- accused, and Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State. 2. The present revision petition is filed by the accused, challenging the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 27.08.2015 passed in C.C. No.198/2015 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Gangavathi (for short, ‘the trial Court’), and the judgment dated 30.08.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.37/2015 by the District and Sessions Judge, Koppal (for short, ‘the appellate Court’). 3. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused, being the driver of KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-34/F-1079, drove the said bus in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and, in the course of such driving, dashed against one Laxmi from behind. As a result of the said accident, Laxmi sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to the Government Hospital at Gangavathi. The - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 complainant, who is the father of the injured victim, reported the incident to the jurisdictional police station, pursuant to which FIR came to be registered. Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed a charge sheet against the accused-driver for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’). 4. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined 8 witnesses as PWs.1 to 8 and marked 14 documents as Exhibits P1 to P14. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. The trial Court, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of the IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 279 IPC and a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 338 IPC. In default of payment of fine for the aforesaid offences, the accused was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months for each default. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 6. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial Court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.37/2015 before the District and Sessions Judge, Koppal. 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 passed by the trial Court. 7. Sri Anand R. Kolli, learned counsel along with Sri Praveen Kumar G., learned counsel for the petitioner- accused, submits that the material evidence on record brought forth by the prosecution is insufficient to prove the guilt of the accused for the charged offences. It is further submitted that the petitioner was driving the bus with utmost care and that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the injured girl. 8. Per contra, Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State, submits that the prosecution has proved its case by examining PW.1 as the eye witness. The evidence of PW.1 would establish that the KSRTC bus was driven at high speed and that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving, resulting in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 grievous injuries sustained by his daughter. The evidence of PWs.2 and 4 would also support the prosecution’s case. It is further submitted that the concurrent findings of both Courts are based on established evidence on record. 9. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. 10. It is evident that on 06.11.2014, Laxmi suffered grievous injuries in an accident caused by the accused while driving the KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-34/F-1079. It is not seriously disputed that Laxmi sustained fatal injuries as a result of the accident. The prosecution examined PW.1, who is both an eye witness and the father of the injured Laxmi. PW.1 provided a comprehensive account of the incident. Similarly, PW.2, an independent witness, stated that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the accused. The evidence of PW.4 also corroborates the testimonies of PWs.1 and 2. The defence extensively cross-examined PWs.1, 2, and 4, however, no material contradictions or infirmities were elicited to discredit their testimonies. PW.5, the conductor of the bus, also deposed to the occurrence of the accident and the injuries - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 suffered by Laxmi. The trial Court rightly considered PWs.1, 2, and 4 as material witnesses in establishing the guilt of the accused. On re-appreciation of the evidence, the appellate Court concurred with the findings of the trial Court. This Court, with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, has examined in detail the evidence of PWs.1, 2, and 4. Their testimonies clearly establish rash and negligent driving by the accused, which resulted in the accident causing grievous injuries to Laxmi. The spot panchnama at Ex.P5 and photographs at Exs.P2 and P3 reveal that the place of the incident is sufficiently wide and the possibility of contributory negligence by the injured girl cannot be accepted. Further, had the accused exercised the least diligence, the accident could have been avoided. 11. The findings recorded by the trial Court and the appellate Court are supported by the established evidence on record. The contentions urged by the defence are contrary to the evidence before the Courts. This Court finds no infirmity warranting interference with the orders of both Courts. Accordingly, the conviction is hereby confirmed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is employed as a driver of the KSRTC bus and that confirmation of the conviction would adversely affect his service. The trial Court, having regard to these aspects, has taken a lenient view by imposing a sentence of payment of fine for the offences under Sections 279 and 338 of the IPC. The exercise of discretion by the trial Court in ordering punishment by way of fine is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. 13. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that confirmation of the conviction would adversely affect the service of the accused is taken into consideration and may be dealt with by appropriate directions. 14. In light of the foregoing discussion and reasoning, the following order: ORDER i. The conviction of the petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of IPC and imposition of fine of Rs.1,000/- for each of the offences passed - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7885 CRL.RP No. 100089 of 2020 by the Court of Prl. Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., at Gangavathi, in C.C.No.198/2015 dated 27.08.2015 and confirmation of the same in Criminal Appeal No.37/2015 passed by the Court of the District and Sessions Judge, at Koppal, is hereby confirmed. ii. However, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the conviction and imposition of the fine will not impact the service conditions of the petitioner. iii. Bail bonds and sureties, if any, stand cancelled. iv. With the above observations, the criminal revision petition is disposed of. Registry to return the trial Court records along with a copy of this order for compliance. Sd/- (K V ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8