HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA Crl.R.C. No. 244 of 2011 DATED: 07.02.2011 Between: Nerusu Veera Raju .. Petitioner/Accused And The State of A.P. Rep. By the State Public Prosecutor .. Respondent JUDGMENT:- The petitioner herein, who is the sole accused, was tried in S.C. No. 1137 of 2007 by the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sangareddy, for the offence punishable under Sections 304-A, 338 and 337 IPC and the learned Magistrate, having considered the evidence both oral and documentary, found the petitioner guilty of the charged offences and convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC, and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 338 IPC and also sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for four weeks for the offence punishable under Section 337 IPC. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 09.07.2009, the accused preferred Crl.A.No.44 of 2009, and the learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, while confirming the charged offences, reduced the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years to one year for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC and modified the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year to a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer Simple Imprisonment for one month for the offences punishable under Section 338 IPC. However, the sentence of fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for four weeks, for the offence punishable under Section 337 IPC remains unaltered. Challenging the judgment of the lower appellate Court, the petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision Case. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 08.05.2007, at about 11:00 a.m., the elder brother of the de facto complainant and one T.Bikshapathi were proceeding from Sangareddy to Zaheerabad on their bike bearing No. AP29 D 6499 and when they reached near cold storage at Peddapur, a lorry bearing No. AP16V 4630 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and at high speed, dashed against another lorry bearing No. MH43 E 5240, which was coming in opposite direction from Zaheerabad side, and both the lorries turned turtle, as a result, the driver of the motorcycle hit the lorry bearing No. AP16V 4630, due to which the elder brother of the de facto complaint and the pillion rider received grievous injuries, the inmates in both the lorries also received injuries and they were all shifted to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad and while undergoing treatment, the brother of the de facto complainant and the driver of the lorry bearing No. MH 43 E 5240 died. On receipt of a complaint, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sadasivpet Police Station, registered a case against the accused- driver of the lorry No.AP 16V 4630, and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly conceded that it is not a fit case where the accused can be acquitted, however he has requested this Court to reduce the sentence imposed by the trial Court and as confirmed by the lower appellate Court to the period of sentence already undergone by the accused. This Court, having perused the material placed on record, is of the view that apparently there was gross negligence on the part of the accused in causing the accident, during the course of which, two persons lost their lives. Under such circumstances, this Court is unable to reduce the sentence to the period of sentence already undergone by the petitioner, as pleaded by the learned counsel for the accused, however having regard to the fact that the alleged offence took place on 08.05.2007 i.e. about four years ago, this Court, while confirming the conviction imposed by the trial and as affirmed by the lower appellate Court of the alleged offences, is inclined to reduce the sentences to the following effect: “The sentences imposed by the trial Court and as modified by the lower appellate Court for the offences punishable under Sections 304-A, 338 and 337 IPC are hereby reduced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month on all counts. So far as the fine amount is concerned, the same remains unaltered. The period of sentence, which the petitioner had already undergone, may be given set off. If the petitioner has completed the period of sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one month, he shall be released forthwith if he is not required in any other case.” With the above observation, this Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. ______________ 07.02.2011 bcj