Telangana High Court
P.Mahender vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 20 March, 2024
1
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1560 OF 2013
O R D E R:
The present Criminal Revision Case is filed aggrieved by
the judgment dated 25.07.2013 passed in Criminal Appeal
No.496 of 2012 on the file of the learned Metropolitan
Sessions Judge, Hyderabad (for short, "the appellate Court")
in confirming the judgment dated 04.04.2012 in C.C.No.891
of 2008 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Hyderabad (for short, "the trial Court").
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for
respondent-State and perused the record.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 11.09.2007, at
about 08.15 hours, when deceased viz., Smt. Suvarna was
proceeding on her moped bearing No.AP-28-AB-3582 from
her residence to the work place, on the way, when she was
passing by ESI cross roads, SR Nagar, the accused drove the
water tanker bearing No.AP-09-J-0642 in a rash and
negligent manner at high speed and dashed her moped from
behind, due to which, she fell down on the road, sustained
bleeding injuries and became unconscious. Immediately, she
was shifted to NIMS hospital, Panjagutta and while
undergoing treatment, she was succumbed to injuries on
23.09.2007, due to complications of fracture of pelvis.
Basing on the complaint, a case was registered against the
accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of
Indian Penal Code (for short, "I.P.C.").
4. On behalf of the prosecution, the trial Court examined
PWs.1 to 8 and marked Exs.P1 to P4.
5. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence
on record, the trial Court vide judgment cited supra, found
the accused guilty and convicted him for the offence under
Section 304-A of I.P.C. Petitioner/accused was sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence
under Section 304-A of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.250/-, in
default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment
for one month.
6. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 04.04.2012, the
petitioner/appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No.496 of
2012 before the appellate Court. The learned appellate
Court after examining the material facts and upon
considering the trial Court judgment in C.C.No.891 of 2008
has dismissed the criminal appeal and the sentence of
simple imprisonment for a period of six months imposed by
the trial Court is modified to simple imprisonment for a
period of three months and fine amount of Rs.250/- is
enhanced to fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of
fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of three months. Challenging the same, the present
revision is filed.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the
trial Court as well as the appellate Court failed to appreciate
the evidence available on record in proper perspective and
passed their respective judgments. Therefore, he seeks to
set aside the impugned judgment.
8. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the same
and contended that both the Courts, upon appreciating the
oral and documentary evidence available on record in right
perspective, passed their respective judgments and the
interference of this Court is unwarranted. Therefore, he
seeks to dismiss the Revision.
9. There is concurrent finding of both the trial Court as
well as the appellate Court with regard to the guilt of the
revision petitioner/accused and the learned counsel for the
revision petitioner/accused did not place anything before
this Court, which would discredit the evidence on record.
Therefore, no interference is warranted as far as conviction
is concerned, but with regard to the sentence, it may be
mentioned that the offence took place in the year 2007,
almost seventeen years have been lapsed and during this
period, the revision petitioner/accused must have repented
for what he did. In these circumstances and in the interest
of justice, it is expedient to reduce the sentence imposed by
the trial Court to undergo simple imprisonment for a period
of six months, which was reduced to three months by the
appellate Court, to one month.
10. The Criminal Revision Case is dismissed, confirming
the conviction imposed by the trial Court, which was
modified by the appellate Court. However, the sentence
imposed by the trial Court to undergo simple imprisonment
for a period of six months for the offence punishable under
Section 304-A of IPC, which was further reduced to three
months by the appellate Court, is reduced to one month.
The remand period already undergone by the accused, if
any, shall be set-off against the terms of the sentence
imposed to him under Section 428(1) of Cr.P.C.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
_____________________
E.V. VENUGOPAL, J
Date: 20.03.2024
mnv
