IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY THE TWELVETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 279 OF 2005 Between: P. Rambabu … Petitioner V/s. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri M. Viswanadham Counsel for the Respondent : Addl. Public Prosecutor The court made the following : order …. Follows 2nd page THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION No. 279 OF 2005 ORDER : This Criminal Revision is directed against the conviction and sentence passed by the II-Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Srikakulam, in Criminal Appeal No. 145 of 2000 dated 16-2-2005 whereby and whereunder the conviction and sentence imposed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Srikakulam, convicting the petitioner under section 304-A of IPC and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months is modified and reduced to six months Rigorous Imprisonment and upheld the conviction. 2. The petitioner was tried for the offence punishable under section 304-A of IPC. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence placed on record, the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam, convicted and sentenced the petitioner to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under section 304-A of IPC. On appeal, the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam on re-appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record whereby and whereunder the conviction imposed by the learned Magistrate in CC.No. 68 of 2000 against the petitioner under section 304-A of IPC was confirmed. But the sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for one year is reduced to six months Rigorous Imprisonment. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Revision is filed. 3. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner confines his argument with regard to the quantum of sentence and prayed mercy of this court. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor representing the State. This Court perused the oral and documentary evidence placed on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, I do not see any reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned II-Additional Sessions Judge and the same is confirmed and the sentence of six months Rigorous Imprisonment is set aside and the petitioner is directed to pay a fine of Rs.6000/- (Rs. Six thousand only) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, apart from the fine which he already paid in the trial court. In default, the petitioner shall suffer simple imprisonment for one month. However, the fine amount of Rs.1000/-, which he already paid, shall remain unaltered. 6. With the above modification in the sentence, the Criminal Revision is accordingly dismissed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO. 12-11-2010 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 279 OF 2005 Circulation Entry No. 15 Date: 12-11-2010 Computer No. 43 Court Master: I s L