State of Karnataka v. Seetharamu K S

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.672 OF 2017 (A) BETWEEN:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SINGATAGERE POLICE, KADUR, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-1. …APPELLANT (BY SRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP [PH]) AND:

SEETHARAMU K S, S/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, DRIVER OF TATA ACE, R/O KENGURUBARAHATTI VILLAGE, BANAVARA HOBLI ARASIKERE TALUK-573 103.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI G NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) AND (3) CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 02.01.2017 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KADUR IN C.C.NO.1256/2015 ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED OF THE OFFENCES P/U/S 279 & 304(A) OF IPC AND SEC.187 OF INDIAN MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 ETC.

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶1The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 02.01.2017 passed by II Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Kadur in CC No.1256/2015.

¶2The brief facts leading to this appeal are as under:

(i) The CPI, Kadur filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) of IPC and 187 of IMV Act.

(ii) It is the case of the prosecution that one Ramakrishna, son of Veerappa, lodged his statement before the Singatagere Police Station that, on 14.05.2015, at 11.30 a.m., when he was near his pomegranate garden situated in Survey No.18/2 of Devarahalli, within the limits of Singatagere police station, at that time, the accused being the driver of a Tata Ace bearing registration No.KA-13/B-0308, was proceeding towards

Devarahalli and drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. As a result, Bhagavan, who was standing on the footboard in the vehicle, fell on road and sustained injuries to his head. CW.6 and CW.7 shifted the injured to the hospital for treatment. However, he succumbed to the injuries on the same day. It is alleged that, after the accident, the accused failed to intimate the same to the concerned Police and also failed to provide first aid to the injured. Thus, the accused has committed the aforesaid offences.

(iii) After filing of the charge sheet, the accused appeared before the Court and was enlarged on bail. Substance of plea was recorded. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(iv) In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined six witnesses as PWs.1 to 6 and marked thirteen documents as Exs.P1 to P13. Thereafter, the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. However, he did not chose to lead any defence evidence.

¶3According to the case of the prosecution, PW.1 is the complainant. PW.2-Ranganatha is a mahazar witness. PW.3-Raghu and PW.4-Pradeepa are the eyewitnesses to the incident. However, both of them have not supported the case of the prosecution. PW.5-Halappa and PW.6-C. Madhusudhan have deposed regarding the respective aspects of the investigation. PW.1-Ramakrishna is not an eyewitness to the incident. However, he lodged the complaint to the Police as per Ex.P1.

¶4The trial court has properly appreciated the material on record in accordance with law and acquitted the accused of the aforesaid offences.

¶5I do not find any legal or factual error in the judgment passed by the trial court. Hence, the appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission.

Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26