Pavankumar S/O Kashinath Naik vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 3758 Kant

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3758 Kant
Judgement Date : 10 November, 2021

Karnataka High Court

Pavankumar S/O Kashinath Naik vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 November, 2021

Bench: H.P.Sandesh

                               1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                 KALABURAGI BENCH

   DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

                          BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                CRL.RP.No.200062/2014

BETWEEN:

PAVANKUMAR S/O KASHINATH NAIK
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
R/O KORWAR, TQ. SINDAGI
DIST. BIJAPUR
                                              ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI SHIVANAND V. PATTANASHETTI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA BENCH
(THROUGH DEVAR-HIPPARGI P.S.,)
                                             ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP)

        THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 R/W SECTION 401 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CODE,    PRAYING   TO   SET   ASIDE   THE   JUDGMENT   DATED
11.08.2014 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
BIJAPUR, IN CRL.A.NO.15/2013 AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO
SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF
SENTENCE DATED 15.02.2013 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE
                                   2




AND JMFC SINDAGI, IN C.C.NO.72/2009 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 279, 337, 304-A OF IPC,
CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER.


        THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                            ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the respondent-State.

2. This revision petition is filed under Section 397

r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C., by the accused praying to set

aside the judgment dated 11.08.2014 passed by the

Principal Sessions Judge, Bijapur, in Criminal Appeal

No.15/2013 and also set aside the judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 15.02.2013 passed by the

Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindagi, in C.C.No.72/2009

convicting the accused for the offences punishable under

Sections 279, 337, 304-A of IPC.

3. Factual matrix of the case is that the

respondent-police have registered the case against the

petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 279,

337, 304-A of IPC making allegation that the petitioner by

riding two wheeler in a rash and negligent manner dashed

against the one Santubai victim, as a result of which, the

said Santubai sustained injuries and succumbed to the

injuries.

4. The prosecution in order to prove its case

examined PWs.1 to 14 and relied upon the documents at

Exs.P1 to P13. The petitioner herein did not choose to

lead any evidence. M.Os.1 to 6 were marked.

5. The trial Court after appreciation of oral and

documentary evidence on record convicted the accused for

the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-

A of IPC. The trial Court sentenced the accused to undergo

simple imprisonment for six months for the offence

punishable under Section 279 of IPC and to undergo

simple imprisonment for two years for the offence

punishable under Section 304-A of IPC and sentenced to

pay fine of Rs.300/- for the offence punishable under

Section 337 of IPC, in default of payment of fine, he shall

undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

6. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of

conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court,

the accused filed criminal appeal before the appellate

Court. The appellate Court on re-appreciating the oral and

the documentary evidence on record confirmed the

judgment passed by the trial Court however, the sentence

imposed on the accused in respect of offence under

Section 304-A of IPC was reduced to one year from two

years.

7. The short question raised by the revision

petitioner before this Court is that once the accused is

convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304-A

of IPC, the trial Court ought not to have convicted the

accused for the offence punishable under Section 279 of

IPC.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the accident has taken place in the year 2008. Both

the Courts have imposed sentence disproportionate to the

offences. Though the appellate Court exercised its

jurisdiction in reducing the sentence for one year for the

offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC, but it has

not exercised its discretion having considered the factual

aspects of the case. Hence, it requires interference of this

Court.

9. Per contra, learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State submits that

the scope of revision is very limited and both the Courts

have appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on

record and gave concurrent finding regarding the offence is

concerned and it does not require any interference by

exercising revisional powers.

10. Having heard the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government

Pleader appearing for the respondent-State and on perusal

of the material on record, the point that arises for

consideration of this Court is,

Whether this Court can exercise revisional power to interfere with the judgments of the trial Court as well as appellate Court regarding conviction under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of IPC?

11. Having perused the material on record, there is

force in the contention of the learned counsel for the

petitioner that once the accused is convicted for the

offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC, the

respective Courts ought not to have convicted the accused

for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC, when

the same merges with higher offence under Section 304-A

of IPC. Hence, it requires interference of this Court

regarding the conviction of the revision petitioner for the

offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC. Taking into

note the concurrent finding regarding negligence on the

part of the revision petitioner which has resulted in the