IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.706 OF 2011 DATED:25.2.2010 Between: Siripurapu Arjuna Rao … Petitioner And The State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.706 OF 2011 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment dated 29.9.2010 passed by the Court of IX Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Visakhapatnam, in Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2008, in confirming the judgment dt.26.3.2008 passed by the of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, in C.C. No.341 of 2005, whereby the petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the petitioner is the driver of the tractor bearing No.AB V 6227 and Trailer bearing No.AB V 6228 and the deceased – A. Appala Narasayya was working as a labourer on the said tractor driven by the accused to transport wooden sleepers. On 13.5.2005 at 2.30 p.m. the deceased along with other labourers loaded railway sleepers into the tractor trailor at O.S.T.D. and while proceeding to goods-shed at Marripalem, the deceased, along with P.Ws.1 to 3 and others, sat on the sleepers. The accused drove the tractor in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against an electric pole, as a result of which the deceased fell down from the trailer along with wooden sleepers and received head injury and lost consciousness. Immediately he was shifted to K.G. Hospital for treatment and while undergoing treatment he succumbed to the injuries. On the next day, at 6.00 a.m., basing on the report of the P.W.1, a case in Crime No.50 of 2005 under Section 304-A of IPC was registered in V- Town Kancharapalem Police Station and it was investigated. The Investigating Officer conducted inquest on the body of the deceased. The Assistant Professor conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased and issued postmortem certificate. The Motor Vehicle Inspector inspected the vehicle and opined that the accident is not due to mechanical defects of the vehicle. On 17.5.2005 the accused was arrested by the Sub-Inspector of Police and produced before the trial Court for remand. After completion of the investigation, the Sub- Inspector of Police, V-Town Kancharapalem Police Station filed the charge sheet against the petitioner - accused for the offence under Section 304-A of IPC. The petitioner was tried in C.C. No.341 of 2005 by the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC. On behalf of the prosecution, the trial Court examined P.Ws.1 to 11 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.11. No witness was examined and no document was marked for the defence. The trial Court, having analysed the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 11 and Exs.P.1 to P.11, vide its judgment dated 26.3.2008 came to the conclusion that the petitioner is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a find of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. The said judgment was questioned by the petitioner by filing Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2008 before the Court of IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, and the learned Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 29.9.2010 concurred with the findings of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. When the judgment was pronounced by the appellate Court on 29.9.2010, the petitioner was absent. In those circumstances, non-bailable warrants were issued. It appears, the petitioner was surrendered on 17.2.2011. When the revision had come up before this Court on 18.2.2011, as it was only one day after surrender of the petitioner, this Court adjourned the matter to today (25.2.2011). As on date, the petitioner is in jail for the last eight days. Learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that it is not a fit case to interfere. He, however, requested to take a lenient view. Having regard to the fact that the alleged offence is of the year 2005 and the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner for the offence under Section 304-A of IPC is only six months, this Court is of the view that the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Court below can be reduced to the period of imprisonment the petitioner has already undergone. In the circumstances, the sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of six months imposed against the revision petitioner – accused by the Courts below for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC., is reduced to that of the period, which the petitioner – accused has already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine. 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 25.02.2011 bnr