- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 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.100314 OF 2016 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MANJUNATH S/O. MALLIKARJUN LALASANGI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O: PYATI ONI, NARENDRA, TQ. AND DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI V.M. BANAKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD. 2. NINGANAGOUDA S/O. FAKKIRGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: R/O: HOSAWAL, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, DHARWAD IN C.C. NO.714 OF 2002 DATED 30.01.2016 AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRL. SESSIONS CIVIL JUDGE, DHARWAD, IN CRL.APPEAL NO.30 OF 2016 DATED 04.10.2016 AND THE PETITIONER KINDLY BE ACQUITTED, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION, COMING ON FOR 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:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND) Heard Sri V.M. Banakar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner–accused, and Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent–State. 2. This revision petition is filed before this Court challenging the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 30.01.2016 passed in C.C. No.714/2002 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharwad (for short, ‘the trial Court’), and the judgment dated 04.10.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.30/2016 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Dharwad (for short, ‘the appellate Court’). 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused, being the driver of a Maxi Cab bearing registration No.KA-25/9757, drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, so as to endanger human life, and first dashed the vehicle against a roadside tree and thereafter against the compound wall of DIMHNS Hospital, near the S.P. Office on P.B. Road. The accident occurred on 08.05.2002 at about 11:30 a.m. As a result of the said accident, CWs.11 to 22, who were - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 occupants of the vehicle, sustained simple injuries; CWs.23 to 27 sustained grievous injuries; and two other inmates succumbed to the injuries sustained. It is further the case of the prosecution that the accused, failed to report the accident to the nearest police station and did not provide any medical assistance to the injured occupants. It is also alleged that the accused did not possess a driving licence at the time of the accident. Upon a complaint being lodged by one of the injured inmates, the criminal law was set into motion. 4. After completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet. In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined 24 witnesses, as PWs.1 to 24, and marked 30 documents, as Exhibits P1 to P30. The statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by the Trial Court. 5. The Trial Court, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC and under Sections 134(a) read with 134(b) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and Section 3 read with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under Section 304-A of the IPC; to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 279 IPC; to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Section 337 IPC; to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 338 IPC; to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 134(a) read with Section 134(b) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Section 3 read with Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In default of payment of fine for each of the aforesaid offences, the accused was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for each default. 6. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial Court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.30/2016. The appellate Court, on re- appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 7. Sri V.M. Banakar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner–accused, submits that the order of conviction has been passed mechanically, without proper appreciation of the evidence on record. It is contended that the conviction suffers from several infirmities and that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. It is further submitted that the findings recorded by both the Courts are not supported by the evidence on record. The learned counsel also submits that the involvement of the accused as the driver of the vehicle is doubtful. 8. Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent–State, submits that the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused by examining PWs.2 to 21. It is submitted that PWs.5 to 20, who were inmates of the Maxi Cab driven by the accused, have consistently deposed that the vehicle was being driven at a high speed and collided with a roadside tree while the accused was attempting to change the cassette. The consistent testimony of the said witnesses establishes that the accused was rash and negligent while driving the Maxi Cab, which resulted in the accident. The other official witnesses have - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 deposed regarding the course of action taken during the investigation. Both the trial Court and the appellate Court, on proper appreciation of the evidence on record, rightly found the accused guilty of the charged offences. 9. This Court has also perused the findings recorded by both the Courts as well as the evidence referred to. On re- appreciation of the evidence, the only possible conclusion is that the accused was rash and negligent while driving the Maxi Cab, which resulted in the accident. No ground is made out to interfere with the concurrent findings. There is no evidence on record to take a different view. Hence, the conviction recorded by the Courts below stands confirmed. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture submits that the sentence of imprisonment be modified to one of fine, considering the age of the accused, the dependency of his family members, and the fact that the accident occurred several years ago. 11. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner merits consideration. The accident occurred in the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 year 2002, and the accused was aged 20 years at the time of the incident. If the accused is now sentenced to undergo imprisonment for an offence committed 23 years ago, it would cause hardship to his family members. The charged offences prescribe a sentence of imprisonment, or fine, or both. If the sentence of imprisonment is modified to payment of fine, and such fine is directed to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased, it would provide some financial assistance and may, to some extent, mitigate the hardship. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to modify the sentence of imprisonment to one of fine. 12. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Criminal Revision Petition is allowed in part. ii. The judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad in C.C.No.714/2002 dated 30.01.2016 and further confirmed by the Prl. Sessions Judge, Dharwad in Criminal Appeal - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 No.30/2016 dated 04.10.2016, is hereby confirmed to the extent of recording conviction. iii. The sentence imposed to undergo imprisonment is modified, substituting with fine amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine amount, the accused- petitioner shall undergo imprisonment as ordered by the Trial Court. iv. Two months time is granted to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court. v. The trial Court shall equally disburse the fine amount electronically in favour of the legal heirs of the deceased persons viz., 1.Sangangouda Patil and 2) Gopal Badiger, on due identification. vi. It is submitted that the petitioner is appointed in the Judicial Department on compassionate ground and he is in service. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays to protect the service rights of the petitioner. The order of conviction and imposition of fine shall not affect the service conditions of the petitioner. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7847 CRL.RP No. 100314 of 2016 vii. Bail bonds, if any, shall stand cancelled. 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.: 13