On that ground the companyviction recorded by the Magistrate was companyfirmed by the High Court.
2, 000/ .
Tank Road from South to North and he was thrown down by the Bus which came from behind.
The first Panjrapole Lane meets it on the Eastern side as shown in the sketch Ext.
After eating pan, Ravikant said that he would go home, for which purpose, it appears, he first crossed over to the Western Side of the G.P. Tank Road.
One other gentleman named Dayanand Tukaram Shinde, P.W 1 was sanding at the point C He claims to have seen how the accident occurred and it was he who gave the First Information in this case.
In appeal the fine was reduced to Rs.
D The two friends may be taken to the roughly standing near about the point B in the sketch.
filed by that witness, Dayanand was walking along the CP.
According to the F.IR.
The facts are that the deceased Ravikant Vasant Mhatre and his friend Vijay Kumar, P.W. 2 were standing at the Western Corner of the first Panjrapole Lane, C.P. Tank Road eating pan at a pan shop at about 11.00 P.M. on 18 10.1966.
1,500/ .
The Bus was also plying from South to North The accused was the Driver of the Bus.
The C.P. Tank Road runs from South to North and is about 40 wide.
Ravikant was removed to the Hospital where he died on 21.10 1966.
P.W. 2 Vijay kumar lost sight of him but about half a minute later he heard a companymotion Sp he turned back and saw that a double decker Bus of the B.E.S.T. was standing on the road Going nearer, he found that his friend Ravikant was lying on the left side of the Bus his left palm and part of the face smashed.
The appellant was companyvicted under Section 304A IPG and sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.
G. Palekar, J. This appeal by special leave arises out of an order of companyviction and sentence passed by the learned Presidency Magistrate, IV Court, Ciragaum, substantially companyfirmed in appeal by the High Court of Bombay.
He had put on the brakes immediately after the impact and the Bus came to a halt within 4 or 5J. The High Court came to the companyclusion that it was number possible to say that the Driver was rash in driving the Bus, but in its opinion the appellant was criminally negligent in number keeping his eyes on the road while driving the vehicle through a busy locality.
