IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD SATURDAY THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.124 of 2007 Between: Hari Suryanarayana ..... PETITIONER/ACCUSED And The State through S.H.O, PS Karimnagar Traffic, rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.124 of 2007 ORDER: The Petitioner, Hari Suryanarayana, hereinafter referred to as the accused, stands convicted by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1st class, Karimnagar, in C.C.No.750/2005 vide judgment dated 08.03.2006 for the offences under Sections 304-A, 338, 337 and 279 of IPC and sentenced as follows: i) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Sec.304-A of IPC; ii) to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Sec.338 of IPC; iii) to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Sec.337 of IPC; and iv) to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Sec.279 of IPC; All the sentences shall run concurrently. On appeal by the accused in Crl.A.No.48/2006, the learned Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, vide judgment dated 05.01.2007 while maintaining the conviction of the accused as recorded by the learned Magistrate, reduced the sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment to six months for the offence punishable under Sec.304-A of IPC and further reduced the sentence to simple imprisonment from six months to three months for the offence punishable under Sec.338 of IPC. The sentence of fine imposed under the said two counts and in default of payment of fine was, however, maintained. Further, the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence in respect of the offences punishable under Sec.337 and 279 of IPC. Aggrieved thereby, the accused has come up before this Court by virtue of the present revision under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., assailing the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by the Courts below. The facts, in brief, are that on 20.04.2005 at about 7.30 p.m. Narsingoju Srinivas (LW 1) along with his friend Valaboju Sadanandam (LW 2) was coming towards Gandhi Chowk from Karkhanagadda on TVS Super Champ bearing No.AP-15-0818 and when they reached near Gandhi statue, and one tractor-cum-trailor bearing No.AP-15-T-5812-5813 was also coming towards Gandhi statue; at that time, a lorry bearing No.AP-16-U-2446 came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the tractor-trailor, as a result thereof, the tractor and trailor got separated, the trailor turned turtle and in the process, it hit the TVS Champ, due to which, the rider and pillion rider viz., Srinivas and Sadandam fell down and sustained injuries and the TVS Champ was damaged; that the inmates of the trailor Munikanti Rajaiah and Irumalla Mondaiah also sustained multiple injuries and while undergoing treatment at Government head quarter hospital, Karimnagar, Irumalla Mondaiah succumbed to injuries. The rider of TVS Champ i.e. Narsingoju Srinivas (LW 1) lodged a complaint before the Sub- Inspector of Police, Karimnagar Traffic, basing on which, a case in Cr.No.50/2004 was registered by the Traffic PS Karimnagar against the lorry driver for the offences punishable under Secs.304-A, 338, 337 and 279 of IPC. After completion of investigation, the police concerned laid charge sheet into the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar, the learned Magistrate taken the same on file in CC.No.750/2005. On appearance of the accused, copies of documents were furnished to him and when he was examined under Sec.251 Cr.P.C, he admitted his guilt for the offences punishable under Secs.304-A, 338, 337 and 279 of IPC and therefore, the trial Court convicted and sentenced him therefor, as stated supra. Against the said conviction of the trial Court, the revision petitioner/accused has preferred Crl.A.No.48/2006 before the learned Sessions Judge, Karimnagar. The learned Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case, and after hearing both sides, confirmed the conviction of the accused, as awarded by the trial Court, however, reduced the sentence imposed for the offences under Secs.304-A and 338 of IPC, as stated supra, while maintaining the sentence of fine. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of the appellate Court, accused preferred this criminal revision case, inter alia, contending that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court failed to appreciate the circumstances of the case and other material available on record in proper perspective and thereby committed error in convicting the accused; that the Courts below failed to see that the revision petitioner/accused had honestly admitted the offence; that both the Courts below ought to have seen that the revision petitioner/accused is aged about 45 years, and that considering his age factor, both the Courts below ought to have imposed fine for all the counts instead of imprisonment. Heard both sides. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has raised self- same grounds, as were raised before the appellate Court. It is further contended that as the revision petitioner/accused is now aged about 51 years, he may be discharged while converting the imprisonment imposed by the Courts below into fine for the offences punishable under sections 304-A and 338 of IPC. The Sessions Court taking the grounds raised by the revision petitioner into consideration, reduced the sentence of rigorous imprisonment from one year to six months and six months to three months for the offences punishable under Sec.304-A and 338 of IPC respectively, as stated supra. In view of the nature of offence, this Court is not inclined to further reduce the sentence of imprisonment. However, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment is converted into simple imprisonment. Therefore, the revision petitioner/accused is liable to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Sec.304-A of IPC. The sentence of fine imposed under the said count and the default sentence for the same is, however, maintained. Except this modification, the conviction and sentence in respect of the offences punishable under Sec.338, 337 and 279 IPC are confirmed. In the result, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed, to the extent, indicated above. The revision petitioner, who is on bail, is directed to surrender before the trial Court forthwith to serve out the remaining sentence. On failure of the revision petitioner to surrender as directed, the trial Court shall proceed against him, in accordance with law. ____________________ B.N.RAO NALLA,J Dated: 03.12.2011 Dsr