THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.52 of 2006 Date:04-6-2010 Between: Shaik Tajuddin, Chirala, Prakasam District. Petitioner/appellant/accused. And State of A.P., rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. Respondnet. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.52 of 2006 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment dated 29.12.2005 passed by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole in Criminal Appeal No.110 of 2003, whereby and whereunder, the learned Judge confirmed the order dated 1.8.2003 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Munisif Magistrate, Chirala in Calandar Case No.45 of 2002, wherein the petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The accused is the driver of a private city bus. On 9.12.2001, one Sambaiah, was going on the cycle from his sister’s house on Chirala-Bapatla road. At that time, the bus bearing No.A.P 27 T 3186, driven by the accused in a rash and negligent way, hit against the cyclist and ran over his head, causing spontaneous death. On the report of one Ravi Kumar (P.W.1), who is son of the deceased, crime has been registered and investigated into. The Motor Vehicle Inspector (P.W.9) checked the vehicle on 10.12.2001 and certified vide Ex.P-6 that the accident is not due to any mechanical defects. The Sub Inspector of Police (P.W.10), after conducting inquest, sent the body for postmortem examination. In the postmortem examination report (Ex.P-5) issued by Dr.Chandra Sekhar (P.W.8), it is stated that “death is due to injuries to fatal structure such as brain”. During the course of further investigation, the Sub-Inspector of Police seized the trip sheet from the Motor Vehicle (Ex.P-11) and arrested the accused on 15.12.2001. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the eye witnesses examined by the prosecution are closely related to the deceased and they were planted witnesses and the other witnesses turned hostile. Hence, the appellant is entitled for acquittal. But on perusal of the record, this Court is not inclined to accept the arguments of the learned counsel. Hence, the learned counsel confined his argument in connection with the quantum of sentence. It is seen from the record that the occurrence is of the year 2001 and the petitioner herein suffered humiliation for the past nine years and he is a married man and he has to look after his school going children and he is the only bread winner of the family. Considering the same, the conviction imposed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court is confirmed. The sentence is modified setting aside the imprisonment. However, the fine amount of Rs.500/- is enhanced to Rs.3,500/-, which shall be paid within four weeks from the date of copy of the order being made ready. The Criminal Revision Case is accordingly disposed of. _________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Date:04-6-2010 mrb