IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2008 / 31ST BHADRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 167 of 2000() ----------------------------- CRA.360/1998 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT-II, KOZHIKODE CC.295/1996 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, THAMARASSERY .................... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED: --------------------- V.JABBAR, S/O.KUNHAYI, KUNNAMANGALAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.MOHAMED ALI SRI.MAT.PAI RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ---------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.76/96 OF KODUVALLY POLICE) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P. No.167 of 2000 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2008. ORDER On a concurrent finding entered by the courts below that on 28.5.1993 at about 5 p.m. the revision petitioner drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and caused hurt/grievous hurt to PWs 1 to 4, he stands convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment. 2. The revision petitioner and counsel were absent at the time of hearing. I heard the Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent. 3. The case is that the bus driven by the revision petitioner hit the lorry driven by CW9. Prosecution examined PWs 1 to 13 to prove the accident. Though, they stated that the bus hit the lorry and some of them suffered hurt/grievous hurt in the accident, PWs 1 to 3, 5 and 6 did not identify the revision petitioner as the driver of the offending vehicle. PW4 stated in chief examination that the revision petitioner was driving the bus at the relevant time but in cross- examination she claimed that she could not see the driver of the bus as the bus was full of passengers. PW13, the A.S.I. who conducted the investigation seized the trip sheet (Ext.P15) from the tool box of the bus on Crl.R.P.No.167/2000 2 29.5.1993. PW13 stated that in Ext.P15, the name of the driver of the bus is written as 'Jabbar'. He also claimed that revision petitioner surrendered at the police station. 4. None of the witnesses to the accident have stated that the revision petitioner was driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. Merely because in Ext.P15 the name of the driver of the bus is given as 'Jabbar' or that the revision petitioner surrendered at the police station, no inference is possible that the revision petitioner was driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. Ext.P15 is not properly proved also. The case against the revision petitioner has to fail for want of proper identification of the bus driver. Conviction and sentence therefore, cannot stand. Resultantly, the revision petitioner succeeds. The conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner are set aside and he is acquitted of the charges against him. Bail bond is cancelled. Crl.M.P.No.955 of 2000 shall stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks Crl.R.P.No.167/2000 3 Thomas P. Joseph, J. Crl.R.P.No.167 of 2000 ORDER 22nd September, 2008.