HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.No.504 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment of the VIII-Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam, in Crl.A.No.230 of 2009 dated 25.02.2011, whereby the learned Judge while confirming the conviction, reduced the sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C., imposed against the petitioner-accused, by the IV-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, in C.C.No.1146 of 2008 dated 09.11.2009, to six months simple imprisonment. It is the case of the prosecution that on 12.01.2008 at 5.00 P.M. while the deceased Kenguva Laxmanarao stood opposite to petrol bunk, N.H.5 road, Maddilapalem, Visakhapatnam, with a view to cross the road, the revision petitioner-accused, who was driving the van bearing No. A.P 31 W 1016 from Maddilapalem towards Hanumanthawaka on N.H.5 road and after passing the petrol bunk, he suddenly stopped and reversed up to the bunk in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and subsequently he died while undergoing treatment. The accused was tried for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C. The prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 10 and got marked Exs.P1 to P6 to prove the guilt of the accused. On perusal of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, the trial Court found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C. and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as stated supra. In an appeal preferred by the revision petitioner-accused against the said conviction and sentence, the learned VIII-Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam, while confirming the conviction, reduced the sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year imposed by the trial Court to six months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner-accused preferred this criminal revision. Heard both sides. Learned Counsel for the revision petitioner fairly conceded that this is not a fit case to interfere with the findings recorded by the appellate Court, but, however, he requested this Court to take a lenient view so far as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. On perusal of the entire evidence on record, this Court is of the view that the appellate Court has given sufficient and cogent reasons in convicting the petitioner-accused. Therefore, no interference is warranted as far as conviction is concerned, but with regard to the quantum of sentence, it is clear from the record that the criminal appeal was dismissed by the appellate Court on 25.02.2011 and the petitioner-accused was taken into custody on the same day itself. So it is clear from the record that the petitioner is in jail for a period of about one week. In the aforesaid circumstances and in the interest of justice, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can be taken by reducing the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the revision petitioner-accused to that of the period already undergone by him. The sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of Six months imposed against the revision petitioner-accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of I.P.C., by the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.230 of 2009 vide its judgment dated 25.02.2011, is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner-accused has already undergone. The petitioner-accused is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other crime. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed with the above said modification. _______________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 07-03-2011 Gsn.