Md. Fazal Rahaman, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2024 Latest Caselaw 3120 Tel

Telangana High Court

Md. Fazal Rahaman, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 6 August, 2024

                               1




     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
     CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1458 OF 2010
JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the

petitioner/accused aggrieved by the judgment dated

16.07.2010 in Crl.A.No.25 of 2009, on the file of II

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nalgonda District

at Suryapet, confirming the judgment dated 23.01.2009 in

C.C.No.602 of 2006 by the Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Suryapet, Nalgonda District.

2. The revision petitioner was convicted for the offence

under Section 304-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo one

year imprisonment. He was not found guilty for the charge

under Section 181 of Motor Vehicles Act.

3. Continuously, there is no representation on behalf of

the appellant on 24.07.2024 and 31.07.2024. Even, today,

there is no representation for the appellant, though the

matter is posted under the caption 'for dismissal'. I have

gone through the record and heard the learned Assistant

Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.

4. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that on

02.06.2006 at about 2:45 p.m. while the deceased-Yadaiah

was going to the fields of his owner on foot and when he

reached near Epicurus Hotel, the accused who was driving

DCM van came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed

against the deceased/Yadaiah, who fell on the ground and

received grievous injuries. He was shifted to area hospital,

Suryapet and while proceeding to Osmania General

Hospital, the deceased died.

5. On the basis of the complaint/Ex.P.1 filed with the

Police, the Police investigated the case and filed charge

sheet for the offence under Section 304-A of IPC and under

Section 181 of M.V.Act for not holding license.

6. Learned Magistrate examined P.Ws.1 to 10 of whom

P.Ws.2 and 6 are the eye-witnesses to the accident. On the

basis eye-witnesses account, the trial Court held that the

accused was driving the DCM van and hit the deceased

while going on the road on foot.

7. Further, the said findings of the trial Court were

confirmed in the appeal by the Sessions Court.

8. Both the Courts below found that not holding Test

Identification Parade is of no consequence since both P.W.2

and P.W.6 have observed the vehicle while it was coming

from Vijayawada side at high speed and dashed against the

deceased who was on the foot along with bulls. Having

stopped the vehicle, the accused got down from the vehicle

and fled from the scene. The evidence of both P.Ws.2 and

6 was believed since both of them have seen the accused

getting down from the vehicle and running away from the

scene of offence.

9. Both, P.W.2 and P.W.6 are independent witnesses

and there is no reason why they would speak false against

the accused. There being no Test Identification Parade will

have no bearing on the identity, since P.W.2 and P.W.6

were present at the scene. Incidents such as these would

have definite impact on the minds of the witnesses. There

are no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of

the Courts below convicting the accused. However, the

sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period of three

months.

10. The trial Court is directed to cause appearance of the

accused and send him to prison to serve out the remaining

part of the sentence.

11. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is partly

allowed.

_________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 06.08.2024 dv