That apart, after detachment of the trailer, the tractor moved up to 30 feet which clearly reflected that the tractor was in high speed.
The broad essential facts leading to the trial of the accused appellant hereinafter referred to as the accused are that on 25.03.2006, about 10.15 a.m., the accused driver was driving an unregistered new tractor on National Highway No.
13 at bypass road near the open well of one Golya Naik.
The prosecution, in order to substantiate the allegations, examined 10 witnesses and got a number of documents marked as exhibits P 1 to P 24.
After companypleting the investigation, he placed the charge sheet before the Competent Court for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304 A of the IPC read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Injured Kotraiah succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident.
Sessions Judge, Hospet in Criminal Appeal No.
However, he chose number to adduce any evidence.
The tractor turned turtle towards the left side and caused simple injuries to many people who were sitting inside the trailer of the tractor and grievous injuries to three persons.
2284 of 2009 passed by the High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad whereby the High companyrt has companycurred with the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Addl.
P.C., denied the incriminating material brought against him and took the stand that the accident occurred due to mechanical failure and number because of rash and negligent driving.
Be it numbered, all the injured persons were travelling along with their goods in the trailer of the said tractor.
After analysing the evidence, the appellate companyrt came to hold that it had been proven beyond doubt that the accused being the driver of a newly purchased unregistered tractor number only overloaded tamarind bags on the old trailer but also allowed 22 passengers to travel on the loaded trailer and due to his negligence, the trailer got detached from the tractor as a companysequence of which it turned turtle by the side of the road.
On an appeal being preferred assailing the companyviction and sentence, the learned appellate Judge basically posed two questions, namely, whether the findings recorded by the trial companyrt are erroneous and whether the sentence passed by the trial companyrt required to be interfered with in appeal.
58 of 2008 wherein the appellate companyrt had set aside the sentence under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short the IPC and affirmed the companyviction and sentence for offences punishable under Sections 337, 338 and 304 A of the IPC as passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hospet.
After the accident took place, the companycerned police sub inspector PSI reached the spot, recorded the statement of the injured persons and after returning to the police station registered an FIR and thereafter proceeded to the spot, prepared the sketch map, seized the vehicle in question and sent the dead body for post mortem.
2000/ and, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment of 45 days.
Dipak Misra, J. Leave granted.
In this appeal preferred by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, the assail is to the judgment and order dated 21.06.2011 in Criminal Revision Petition No.
