THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2121 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment dated 16.12.2004 made in Crl.A.No.172 of 2002 by the V Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Eluru. The case of the prosecution is as follows: The petitioner-accused is the driver of the mini lorry bearing No.AP 27 T 2992. On 24.4.1999 at about 11 a.m., he proceeded from N.D.R. godowns near Micro Station towards Rajahmundry. When the mini lorry reached Kanaka Durga’s temple, Tadepalligudem outskirts at 11.30 a.m., he drove the mini lorry in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against opposite coming Ambassador Car bearing No.AP 31 V 3675 and went away towards right side and dashed one B. Nageswara Rao-deceased, who was coming from Kanaka Durga’s temple, as a result of which, the deceased received serious injuries and he was brought to Government Hospital, Tadepalligudem. While undergoing treatment, the said Nageswara Rao died. On the statement given by P.W.1, a case in Crime No.92 of 1999 was registered. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed and the same was taken cognizance as C.C.No.154 of 1999 for the offences under Sections 304-A IPC and 134(a) & (b) r/w187 of M.V.Act. On appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioner-accused guilty of the offences under Section 304-A IPC and 134(a) & (b) r/w187 of M.V.Act, and accordingly sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 304-A IPC and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.250/- under each count for the offences punishable under Sections 134(a) & (b) r/w 187 of M.V. Act in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days under each count. The total fine amount of Rs.2,500/- to be realized from the accused is awarded as compensation to the mother of the deceased. Challenging the said judgment, the petitioner-accused preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.172 of 2002 before the V Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Eluru. The learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction for the offences under Section 304-A IPC and 134(a) & (b) r/w187 of M.V.Act, but reduced the sentence of R.I. for one year to six months, while maintaining the sentence of fine under Sections 304-A IPC and 134(a) & (b) r/w187 of M.V.Act. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner filed the present revision. Learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused fairly conceded that this is not a fit case for interference, but he requested to take a lenient view insofar as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned, having regard to the fact that the petitioner was in jail for a period of two weeks. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner-accused, I feel that the conviction recorded by the Courts below do not warrant any interference. But however, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been wandering around the Courts since 1999 and in view of the fact that the petitioner-accused was in jail for a period of two weeks, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case where a lenient view can be taken. Accordingly, the sentence imposed by the lower appellate Court against the petitioner-accused for the offence under Section 304-A IPC is reduced to the period already undergone. In the result, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under section 304-A IPC imposed by the lower appellate Court on the petitioner-accused is reduced to the period already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine under Sections 304-A IPC and 134(a) & (b) r/w187 of M.V.Act. With the above modification, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 10th March, 2011 Nn THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2121 of 2004 10.3.2011