9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to judgment of learned Single Judge of Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissing criminal revision filed by the appellant regarding conviction u/s 279 and 304A of IPC.
Details of the Judgment: 1. The appellant was convicted for offences u/s 279 and 304A of IPC by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate and sentenced accordingly. The appeal before the Sessions Judge was dismissed. 2. A revision petition was filed before the High Court questioning conviction and sentence, which was also dismissed. 3. The prosecution's version stated that the appellant's rash and negligent driving caused a fatal accident involving victims from a bus. Evidence included statements, spot map, and photographs. 4. The High Court upheld the Trial Court's findings, rejecting the argument that the accident was due to negligence of the bus driver. Limited scope for interference in revisional jurisdiction was considered. 5. Appellant's counsel argued that the requirements for Sections 279 and 304A were not met, and the sentence was harsh. Requested reduction in sentence due to time served. 6. Counsel for the State supported the decisions of the lower courts. 7. Citing Duli Chand v. Delhi Administration, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of factual determination in cases of vehicular accidents. 8. Referring to State of Orissa v. Nakula Sahu and State of Kerala v. Puttamana Illath Jathavedan Namboodiri, the Court highlighted the limitations of revisional jurisdiction in correcting miscarriage of justice. 9. The Trial Court and Revisional Court's detailed analysis of evidence was found to be without error, justifying the High Court's decision not to interfere. 10. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower courts' conclusions and the High Court's decision not to exercise revisional jurisdiction.
|
