IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.23489 OF 2007 Between: Smt. Deepa Petwal and four others. … Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department, A.P.State Secretariat, Hyderabad, reptd., by its Secretary and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri A.Eswar for Sri B.Chandrasen Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home for R.1 to R.3. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Metropolitan City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad, to enquire into the execution of sentence in C.C.No.881 of 2001 as confirmed and reduced by the High Court in Criminal Revision Case No.302 of 2003 on 20-2-2006. On account of an accident committed by respondent No.4, through his rash and negligent driving, the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioners 2 to 5 died. Respondent No.4 was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 304-A and 337 IPC and found guilty of the said offences, and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- respectively, by the learned IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, vide his judgment dated 10-10-2002 in C.C.No.881 of 2001. In Appeal No.306 of 2002 filed by respondent No.4, the learned Special Judge for Economic Offences-cum-VIII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, confirmed his conviction for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC, but set aside the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 337 IPC through his judgment dated 4-3-2003. In Criminal Revision Case No.302 of 2003, this Court by judgment dated 20-2-2006 confirmed the conviction of respondent No.4, but reduced the sentence from six months to three months simple imprisonment, while giving set-off to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite conviction of respondent No.4, he was not apprehended and the sentence of imprisonment was not given effect to. The Inspector of Police, Abids Police Station, Hyderabad, respondent No.2 herein, filed a counter- affidavit, in which it is mentioned that on receipt of credible information on 8-12-2007, the Sub-Inspector of Police, along with two Constables, apprehended respondent No.4 at his residence, arrested him by executing the warrant issued against him under intimation to his brother-Sri Anil Agarwal, and on the same day he was produced before the II Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, who passed an order remanding respondent No.4 to judicial custody. It is further averred that the learned Magistrate directed the Police to produce respondent No.4 on 10-12-2007 and, accordingly, he was produced before the said Magistrate on the same day and the learned Magistrate sent him to Central Prison, Hyderabad, on the same day, for serving the sentence of imprisonment. It is further stated that as respondent No.4 was absconding after passing of the judgment by this Court, warrant against him could not be executed till 8-12- 2007. The petitioners did not file any reply-affidavit controverting the above-mentioned averments contained in the counter-affidavit. Therefore, this Court has no option except to accept the said averments as true and correct. Inasmuch as respondent No.4 was sent to Central Prison, Hyderabad, for serving the sentence of imprisonment, the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for consideration. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed as infructuous. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 21-4-2008 MNR