Mohd Modin , Gore, vs The State Of A.P., Rep By Pp.,
2024 Latest Caselaw 2189 Tel

Telangana High Court

Mohd Modin , Gore, vs The State Of A.P., Rep By Pp., on 11 June, 2024

        THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

           CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.641 OF 2010

ORDER:

The revision petitioner was convicted by the Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.1551 of 2006, vide

Judgment dt.03.12.2008, for the offence punishable under Section

304-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo

Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six month. Aggrieved by the

same, the revision petitioner filed Crl.A.No.32/2009 before the

Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, and the learned

Sessions Judge while dismissing the appeal, confirmed the

conviction and sentence of the trial Court vide Judgment

dt.19.03.2010. Aggrieved by same, the revision petitioner is before

this Court.

2. Heard.

3. According to the case of prosecution, the revision petitioner

while driving the lorry bearing No.AP 12 U 4968, dashed against

the cyclist. On account of which the cyclist fell down and came

under rear wheels of the lorry and died instantaneously. Crime

was registered and the Police filed charge sheet.

4. Learned Magistrate examined PWs.1 to 5 and marked Exs.P1

to P10. The version of the eye-witness-PW2 was believed by the

Court below and accordingly, the revision petitioner was

convicted. Learned Sessions Judge also has given reasons to

believe the evidence of PW2 and confirmed the conviction.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would

submit that it is improbable that PW2 was an eye-witness to the

said accident. He was later planted as a witness to the accident.

Further, the driver was stranger and the question of identifying

him in the Court by PW2 during the course of trial is highly

improbable.

6. The said ground raised by the learned counsel for the

revision petitioner is not tenable. Admittedly, PW2 was running

STD booth and saw the accident. The accident happened within a

distance of 20 feet from his STD booth. In the said circumstances,

identification by PW2 cannot be disbelieved.

7. However, keeping in view that there are no cases pending

against the revision petitioner and he has dependents who are

wife, children and parents to look after, this Court deems it

appropriate to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to a period of

three months.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is partly allowed

reducing the sentence of imprisonment of the revision petitioner

from six months to three months. The trial Court shall cause

appearance of the accused/revision petitioner and send him to

prison to serve out the remaining part of the sentence.

14. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is partly allowed.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending

shall stand closed.

___________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 11.06.2024 tk