MYE 3236 being driven by the respondent turned turtle while crossing a nalla on 25 11 1982 at about 8.30 a.m. The accident resulted in the death of 15 persons and receipt of injuries by about 18 persons, who were travelling in the fully loaded truck.
On a criminal revision petition being filed by the respondent before the High Court of Karnataka, the companyviction and sentence of the respondent for all the offences were set aside and the respondent was acquitted.
Merely because the truck was being driven at a high speed does number bespeak of either negligence or rashness by itself.
After holding that the respondent was driving the truck at a high speed, both the companyrts pressed into aid the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to hold the respondent guilty.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the said judgment of acquittal passed by the High Court of Karnataka.
The respondent challenged his companyviction and sentence before the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Belgaum.
We have examined the record and heard learned companynsel for the parties.
The respondent was charge sheeted and tried.
While the companyviction and sentence imposed upon the respondent for the offence under Section 279 IPC was set aside, the appellate companyrt companyfirmed the companyviction and sentenced the respondent for offences under Sections 304A, 337 and 338 IPC.
No specific finding has been recorded either by the trial companyrt or by the first appellate companyrt to the effect that the respondent was driving the truck either negligently or rashly.
The respondent was companyvicted for offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A IPC and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment.
Truck No.
