- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 483 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. PAKKIRAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, DRIVER OF BUS R/O CHIKKABBURU VILLAGE, SORABA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DIST- 577 429 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PARAMESWARAIAH D C,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHIRALAKOPPA POLICE R/P BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C (U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT OF CONVICTION PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA IN CRL.A.NO.16/2023 DTD 31.12.2024 AND THE JUDGEMENT AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIKARIPURA IN CC.NO.224/2019 DTD 21.01.2023 AND FURTHER PLEASED TO ACQUIT THE PETITIONER IN THE ABOVE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER This matter is listed for admission. 2. Heard the counsel appearing for revision petitioner and also learned HCGP appearing for respondent/State. 3. The factual matrix of the case of prosecution before the trial Court that on 30.12.2018 at about 9.15 a.m., the deceased Shakil, S/o. Miyajaan was going on the foot path by walking in Udugani village within the jurisdiction of Shiralakoppa PS infront of vegetable shop of Samiulla S/o Biram Khan on Shiralakoppa Shikaripura State Road at that time accused being the driver of Sri.Veereshwara Motor Service Bus No.KA-14-A-7255 came from Shiralikoppa to Shikaripura in a rash and - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 negligent manner and was trying to take over the vehicle infront of him and went towards right side of the road and dashed to the Shakil S/o. Miyajaan and the right wheel of the bus ran over the Shakil S/o. Miyajaan due to which the said Shakil S/o. Miyajaan died on the spot and accused ran way from the spot without intimation to the police as such it is alleged that accused has committed offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of Indian Penal Code and 134(A&B) R/w Section 187 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘IMV’ Act for short). On the basis of information given by C.W.1, the police have registered a case against accused in crime No.243/2018 and registered FIR for the offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC and 134(A&B) R/w Section 187 of IMV Act and after investigation, the police have filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences. The cognizance was taken and accused was secured. He pleaded not guilty and claims the trial. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 6 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P13. On the other hand, the accused was examined and he was subjected to recording of statement under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused denied the same and did not choose to lead any defence evidence on his behalf. The trial Court based on evidence available on record, convicted and sentence the accused for the aforesaid offences. The said judgment is challenged before the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.16/2023 wherein the appellate Court also reassessed both oral and documentary evidence, confirm the order of the trial Court. Being aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner is before this Court in the present revision. 5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would vehemently contend that the Courts below have failed to properly appreciate the oral and documentary - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 evidence available on record and failed to consider the material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses which go to the root of the prosecution case and create serious doubt regarding the alleged incident. It is further contended that the prosecution has failed to establish that the revision petitioner was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner endangering human life. It is also contended that the Court below have erred in placing evidence on the testimony of interested witnesses without corroboration from independent witnesses, though such independent witnesses were available but not examined by prosecution. On all these factors, the trial Court convicted and sentence the accused. Therefore, the interference is required by this Court. 6. Per contra, the learned HCGP appearing for respondent/State would vehemently contend that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court rightly convicted and - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 sentence the accused for the said offences and therefore, there is no interference by this Court. 7. Having heard the counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent/State, it is clear that the trial Court having taken note of the case of prosecution mainly relies upon the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 with regard to rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver. He took the vehicle towards the extreme right side and dashed against Shakil, who was going by walk. Even from the photographs which was taken at the spot panchanama as per Exs.P3 and P4 supported with CD at Ex.P5 and the same is observed in paragraph number 23 and also in paragraph No.24 taken note of though contention was taken that PWs.1 and 2 are the interested witnesses and their evidence cannot be discarded only on the ground that they are relatives and their evidence is consistent while giving the evidence that nothing is discredited during the - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 cross examination and apart from that, P.W.3 also was in his vegetable shop which is near the spot where the accident was taken place and considered the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 corroborates with each other. The trial Court also taken note of additional evidence and convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 279 and 304A of IPC and 134(A&B) R/w Section 187 of IMV Act. The trial Court however committed an error in respect of imprisonment period of two months for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and default sentence for a period of 15 days and when the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC merges with the serious offence of 304A of IPC, ought not to have convicted for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and hence judgment of conviction and order of sentence for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC requires to be set aside. However, the trial Court took note of the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 and other witnesses and also invoking of offences punishable under Section 187 of IMV Act and - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 with regard to the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC and also for the offence punishable under IMV Act does not require any interference. The appellate Court also having reassessed the evidence available on record, but considering the factual aspects of the case, reduced the sentence to 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC and the appellate Court already exercised its discretion in a case of accident that minimum sentence would be 6 months and the same is reduced and when such reasoning is given by the appellate Court while exercising the appellate jurisdiction, considering the evidence available on record particularly the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 and also Ex.P10 i.e., sketch which was relied upon by the trial Court, is very clear that the driver of the bus went towards the right side of the road and dashed against him and the same is towards extreme side of the road. The accident was taken place in the State Highway and total width of the road is 40 feet, that too in front of the bus stand only, the accident was occurred. Further, - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 the IMV report is also very clear which is marked as Ex.P13. Only front right side bumper was slightly pressed inward and therefore, it is clear that bus went and dashed against the victim. Even in 313 statement also, nothing is stated but only says that he was driving the bus in a slow manner. The accused himself came and dashed against the bus and the same is not substantiated. 8. Under these circumstances, I do not find any grounds to entertain the revision petition and material evidence taken note of by the trial Court as well as the appellate Court with regard to rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver and dashing against the person who was walking on the left side of the road and bus went and dashed against the right side and caused accident. Hence, no grounds are made out to admit this revision petition. 9. In view of the discussions made above, I proceed to pass the following: - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010206432026 NC: 2026:KHC:38887 CRL.RP No. 483 of 2026 ORDER a. Criminal revision petition is allowed in part. b. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC against the accused is set aside and if fine is deposited, ordered to refund on proper identification and in respect of other offences confirmed. c. It is clarified that the sentence must run concurrently in respect of the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC and Section 187 of IMV Act. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35