AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 263 wordsB.V. Pinto
This petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings so far as the petitioner is concerned in. CC NO.372/2009 pending on file of C.J. & J.M.F.C., Court, K.R.Pet, Mandaya District.
The petitioner has been charge sheeted along with the driver of the vehicle on the ground that, the petitioner has given his bike to the driver of the vehicle and that the driver of the vehicle has committed the offence under Section. 279, 337, 338 of IPC r/w Section 184, 177, 181, 182 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act
Heard Sri C.S. Hiremath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vijaykumar Majage, learned HCGP for the State/ Respondent.
The part played by the petitioner is that, he has giving his bike to the driver of the vehicle and no offence is prescribed for the owner of the vehicle, who has lent his vehicle to come body else. Hence, action of the petitioner is not an offence at all. It is the driver who is lisble for the offence. It is stated that, the petitioner was not even present when the accident took place. Hence, inclusion of the petitioner as accused is misconception on the part of the police and necessarily, petition deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly the petitions is allowed. The proceedings in CC No. 372/ 2009 pending on the file of C.J. & J.M.F.C. Court K.R.Pet, Mandya District so far as this petitioner is concerned is hereby quashed.
In view of the final disposal of the main petition, Misc.Crl.3523/10 becomes infructuous and disposed of accordingly.