Bhanu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 10167 MP

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                       BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA
                                                   ON THE 5 th OF JULY, 2023
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2612 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           BHANU S/O RAM MILAN, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O
                           NARSINGHGARH,   DISTRICT   DAMOH    (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI SHUBHAM BHARDWAJ - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                           STATION DAMOH DEHAT DISTRICT DAMOH (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI PRASANNAJEET CHATTERJEE - PANEL LAWYER)

                                 Reserved on     : 1.7.2023
                                 Pronounced on: 5.7.2023
                                 ________________________________________________

                                 Th is revision coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                               ORDER

The applicant stands convicted by both the courts below for Sections 279 and 338 of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for three months and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, under Section 338 of IPC and also for Section 3/181 as well as Section 77/177 of the Motor Vehicles Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment "till the rising of the Court" with a fine of Rs.500/- and only to a

Signature Not Verified fine of Rs.100/- respectively, with default stipulations. The judgment of JMFC Signed by: NITESH PANDEY Signing time: 7/7/2023 5:50:06 PM

Damoh was passed in RCT No.2100255/2016 on 29.10.2021 and it was confirmed by the impugned judgement passed by Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh, on 14.6.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.51/2021. Against this impugned judgment the present revision petition has been filed.

2. The facts of the prosecution case are that on 16.12.2015 at around 17:20 p.m., the victim was going from Narsinghgarh to Damoh on his motorcycle. His companions were also on their own motorcycles. The victim was driving on the left side of road within the prescribed speed limit. Near the over-bridge, the applicant coming on his motorcycle from the opposite side dashed against the vehicle of victim. The accident occurred because the

applicant was driving his vehicle on the wrong side. The victim as well as the applicant suffered injuries and cross-cases were registered against them. The investigation was completed and the applicant was put on trial in which he was convicted and sentenced along with co-accused Ram Milan. The conviction and sentence of applicant were upheld by the impugned judgment.

3. This revision has been preferred on the ground that the courts below failed to appreciate the evidence in correct perspective. The incident was not seen by any of the witnesses, yet the courts considered them to be the eyewitnesses. It was admitted by alleged eyewitness Ashok Patel that he did not give any statement to the police and he was asked to sign on blank papers. There was no evidence regarding the alleged negligence and rashness on the part of applicant. The Investigating Officer failed to conduct proper investigation, still his testimony was relied upon by the courts below. Based on these grounds, it is prayed that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence be set aside in this revision petition. Signature Not Verified Signed by: NITESH PANDEY Signing time: 7/7/2023 5:50:06 PM

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the revision stating that the judgment does not call for any interference as it is in accordance with the facts established and prevalent laws.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgments and records of both the courts below.

6 . The present applicant is held convicted for driving a motorcycle without possessing a valid driving licence, without there being any number plate on the vehicle for driving his vehicle rashly on the wrong side of road and for dashing it against the motorcycle of the victim which was coming from the opposite direction. It is claimed by the applicant that he reported the matter of rash and negligent driving and causing accident against the victim. This fact has been admitted by victim Madhav Pateriya (P.W.3) in para 6 of his statement wherein he has disclosed that Case No.339/2016 is pending against him regarding this accident in the Court of JMFC Damoh. During final arguments, learned counsel for the applicant has revealed that the criminal case registered against the victim has been decided in acquittal.

7. Both the courts below, after appreciating the evidence, have reached to the finding that it was the applicant who drove his vehicle on the wrong side of road and caused the accident. For this, they have relied upon the testimony of victim Madhav Pateriya (P.W.3). Not a single fact could be highlighted during

his cross-examination which would make his testimony unreliable or contradictory. Mubarak Khan (P.W.4) has admitted that he did not see the accident personally but claims to have reached the spot immediately thereafter. Para 2 of his statement shows that he found the victim lying on the left side of Narsinghgarh-Damoh road and the person who caused the accident was also

Signature Not Verified lying there. This part of his statement was not challenged during his cross- Signed by: NITESH PANDEY Signing time: 7/7/2023 5:50:06 PM

examination. The observation made by the person reaching the spot immediately after the accident is very relevant and shows that the victim was driving his vehicle on the correct side of the road and the accident occurred when the vehicle of applicant had crossed its side and went on the wrong side, dashing against the motorcycle of victim.

8 . Ashok Patel (P.W.7) whose name is mentioned in the FIR is the person accompanying the victim. He has stated that he could not see the accident as he was far behind but he too has disclosed that the victim was driving the vehicle on the correct side while the applicant coming from the opposite side drove his vehicle on the wrong side of road. Ashok Patel is the person who brought the injured/victim to the hospital. The facts disclosed by this witness on the basis of observations made about the crime scene, support the testimony of victim and witness Mubarak Khan.

9 . Ex.P6 is the spot-map prepared by Investigating Officer Ganesh Dubey (P.W.5) in which the place of accident is marked as "A" which is on the left side of Narsinghgarh-Damoh road and mark "B" shows that the applicant wrongly drove his vehicle from that mark, which was on the opposite side of road to the mark "A" and caused the accident by dashing against the motorcycle of victim. It is very relevant to mention here that no question during cross-examination was put to Investigating Officer Ganesh Dubey the spot-map prepared by him.

10. The applicant had appeared before the trial court as defence witness. His statements disclose that the factum of accident was not denied by him. His claim was that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving by the victim but no evidence has been further produced by him to support this plea. It Signature Not Verified Signed by: NITESH PANDEY Signing time: 7/7/2023 5:50:06 PM

is already mentioned above that the acquittal of victim in cross-case is a fact admitted by the applicant. Therefore, merely on the basis of statements of applicant, the alleged negligence of victim cannot be examined in this revision petition.

11. The conviction of applicant under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act for not having a valid driving licence and not having the number plate on his motorcycle are the facts that have not been seriously challenged in this revision petition. The examination of record of the trial court shows that the only driving licence, which was produced by the applicant, was of his father and the seizure memo of motorcycle, that was being driven by the applicant at the time of accident, shows that it was not having a number plate on the back side of the vehicle. No cross-examination of Ganesh Dubey was undertaken regarding these details of motorcycle while he was the maker of seizure memo.

12. After this analysis of facts and evidence, this court is of the view that no error was committed by the courts below in convicting the applicant under sections 279 and 338 of IPC and sections 3/181 and 77/177 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The records show that two grievous injuries were sustained by the victim in this accident. For this, the applicant has been sentenced under Section 338 of IPC to three months RI and fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

13. Under the exercise of power of Section 386(B)(iii) of Cr.P.C., the sentence of imprisonment and fine amount is set-aside and the applicant is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the victim-Madhav S/o Dalchand Pateriya, aged about 50 years, R/o S.P.M. Nagar, Damoh. This payment shall be made by depositing the amount within 15 days from the judgment and it shall be the liability of trial Court to inform the victim and Signature Not Verified Signed by: NITESH PANDEY Signing time: 7/7/2023 5:50:06 PM

ensure payment to him of this amount. In case the victim fails to deposit the amount within the prescribed time limit, the trial Court shall send him to custody to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months.

Let the copy of this order along with its records be sent to the Courts below for information and compliance.

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE ps/Nitesh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NITESH PANDEY Signing time: 7/7/2023 5:50:06 PM