9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Conviction under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code for causing death by rash or negligent driving. 2. Appeal against conviction and sentence to the Sessions Court, Delhi. 3. Revision Application in the High Court challenging the conviction and sentence. 4. Review of evidence by the High Court in the Revision Application. 5. Exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution by the Supreme Court. Analysis: 1. The case involved an appeal by special leave against an order of the High Court of Delhi rejecting a Revision Application against an appellate order confirming the conviction under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. The incident leading to the conviction was witnessed by three eye-witnesses, and the appellant was found guilty of causing death by negligent driving. 2. The appellant appealed the conviction to the Sessions Court, Delhi, where the sentence was reduced to six months considering a possible lapse into absent-mindedness by the appellant. Dissatisfied with the decision, the appellant filed a Revision Application in the High Court, which upheld the conviction after re-examining the evidence, leading to the present appeal in the Supreme Court. 3. The High Court, while exercising supervisory jurisdiction, reviewed the evidence to ensure the correctness of the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts. Despite the limited scope of revision, the High Court confirmed the conviction based on the established evidence of negligent driving leading to the death of the deceased. 4. The Supreme Court emphasized that it does not routinely re-appreciate evidence from lower courts but intervenes only in exceptional cases of manifest illegality or serious miscarriage of justice. In this case, the Court noted that the lower courts' appreciation of evidence was correct, supported by telltale circumstances, and affirmed the conclusion of negligent driving leading to the death of the deceased. 5. The Supreme Court analyzed the speed of the bus and the circumstances of the incident, concluding that while the speed may not have been excessive, the appellant's failure to notice the deceased and apply the brakes promptly constituted gross negligence. The Court upheld the findings of the lower courts, affirming the appellant's guilt under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and instructing the appellant to surrender to bail.
|
