Karnataka High Court

Deepak S/O. Babu Alias Baburao Gavade vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 February, 2024

Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty

                                                     -1-
                                                             NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389
                                                            CRL.RP No. 100356 of 2021




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                              DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                                   BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

                       CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100356 OF 2021 (397)

                      BETWEEN:

                      DEEPAK S/O BABU
                      @ BABURAO GAVADE
                      AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
                      R/O. BHAGYA NAGAR,
                      BELAGAVI.

                                                                            ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                      REPRESENTED BY
                      STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                      DHARWAD BENCH,
                      DHARWAD,
ANNAPURNA             THROUGH HUKKERI-POLICE STATION,
CHINNAPPA             HUKKERI BELAGAVI
DANDAGAL
Digitally signed by                                                        ...RESPONDENT
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA DANDAGAL    (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
Date: 2024.02.23
10:26:22 +0530
                             THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397 (1)
                      R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED
                      08.11.2021   IN   CRIMINAL   APPEAL    NO.213/2017   BY   THE   VII
                      ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI AND
                      JUDGMENT DATED 27.09.2017 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND
                      JMFC, HUKKERI IN CC NO.458/2015 FOR OFFENCE U/S 304A OF IPC
                      AND THEREBY ACQUITTING THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED.
                                   -2-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389
                                        CRL.RP No. 100356 of 2021




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

1. This revision petition under Sections 397 read with 401

Cr.PC is filed with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order

of conviction and sentence dated 27.09.2017 passed by the

Court of Civil Judge & JMFC, Hukkeri, in C.C.No.458/2015, and

the judgment and order dated 08.11.2021 passed by the Court

of VII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Belgavi, in

Crl.A.No.213/2017.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. Petitioner herein was charge sheeted for the offences

punishable under Sections 279 & 304A IPC by Hukkeri police,

Belagavi District and he was tried for the charge sheeted

offences before the Trial Court in C.C.No.458/2015. In the said

proceedings, the petitioner had appeared before the Trial Court

and claimed to be tried. In support of its case, the prosecution

had examined eight witnesses as PWs-1 to 8 and got marked

20 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-20. In support of his defence,

accused had not led any evidence. The Trial Court vide the

impugned judgment and order dated 27.09.2017 passed in

NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389

C.C.No.458/2015 had convicted the petitioner for the offences

punishable under Sections 279 & 304A IPC and the petitioner

was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of

one month and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under

Section 279 IPC and in default, he was directed to undergo

simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. For the offence

under Section 304A IPC, the petitioner was sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and

pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of one month. The Appellate Court in

Crl.A.No.213/2017 has set aside the judgment and order of

conviction passed by the Trial Court for the offence under

Section 279 IPC and confirmed the judgment and order of

conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court for the

offence punishable under Section 304A IPC. Being aggrieved by

the same, the petitioner/accused is before this Court.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that during

the pendency of this revision petition, PW-7 who is the father of

the victim and his family members have come forward to settle

the dispute and PW-1 has agreed to receive the compensation

of Rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner. He submits that the said

NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389

amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been already deposited by the

petitioner to the bank account of PW-7 - Shivaling Bhimappa

Madakari. He has filed a joint memo before this Court to the

said effect and prays that leniency may be shown while

sentencing the petitioner. The joint memo filed today before

this Court which is signed by the petitioner and PW-7 is taken

on record and the same reads as under:

JOINT MEMO

Herein the joint memo on behalf of the revision petitioner and father of victim/deceased Mr. Shivaling Bhimappa Madakari submit as under:

That, father of victim/deceased Mr. Shivaling Bhimappa Madakari has agreed received an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and the revision petition has agreed to pay.

And accordingly the revision petitioner herein has deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as agreed, into the Bank Account of Mr. Shivaling Bhimappa Madakari father of victim/deceased bearing No.37510102778 dated 22.02.2024 of Union Bank of India.

5. The offence for which the petitioner has been convicted

by the courts below is a non-compoundable offence. The parties

have today approached this Court stating that the dispute

NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389

between them has been settled. Taking into consideration the

nature of offence and the sentence imposed on the accused,

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of HASI MOHAN

BARMAN & ANOTHER VS STATE OF ASSAM & ANOTHER -

(2008)1 SCC 184, has held that Courts can consider reducing

the sentence imposed on the accused having regard to the

settlement arrived between the parties.

6. In the case of MANISH JALAN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA

reported in (2008)8 SCC 225, wherein, the accused was

convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and

304(A) of IPC, having regard to the settlement arrived between

the parties and considering the affidavit filed by the mother of

the victim in the said case, wherein she had agreed to receive

an additional compensation from the petitioner and had

volunteered to compound the offences against him, the Hon'ble

Supreme Court at paragraphs 16 and 17 has observed as

follows:

"16. True that in the instant case the appellant has been found to be guilty of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC for driving rashly and negligently on a public street

NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389

and his act unfortunately resulted in the loss of a precious human life. But it is pertinent to note that there was no allegation against the appellant that at the time of accident, he was under the influence of liquor or any other substance impairing his driving skills. It was a rash and negligent act simplicitor and not a case of driving in an inebriated condition which is, undoubtedly despicable aggravated offence warranting stricter and harsher punishment.

17. Having regard to all these facts and bearing in mind the fact that the mother of the victim has no grievance against the appellant and has prayed for some compensation, we are of the view that a lenient view can be taken in the matter and the sentence of imprisonment can be reduced. We are of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone but in addition thereto, the appellant should be directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the mother of the deceased by way of compensation. The learned counsel for the appellant, in fact, indicated that his was willing to pay that much amount. We order accordingly."

NC: 2024:KHC-D:4389

7. It is not the case of the prosecution that the petitioner in

the present case was driving the offending vehicle under the

influence of liquor or any other substance impairing his driving

skills. The accident in question had taken place in the year

2015. The parties have filed a joint memo reporting settlement

and in the said joint memo, PW-7 who is the father of the

victim has stated that he has received a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

from the petitioner. PW-7 who present in the court states that

settlement between the parties is voluntary without there being

any coercion and he has agreed to receive the amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner as compensation. Under the