IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY THE FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 9 4 6 of 2005 Between: Boini Sudhakar … Petitioner V/s. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri Vemuganti Ramchander Rao Counsel for the Respondent : Addl. Public Prosecutor THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION No. 9 4 6 OF 2005 O R D E R : This Criminal Revision is directed against the conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 169 of 2002, dated 03-6-2005, confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sultanabad, in CC.No. 200 of 1999, dated 15-11-2002, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner was found guilty for the offence punishable under section 304-A of IPC and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months. 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 Magistrate found the petitioner guilty for the offence punishable under section 304-A of IPC and sentenced him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record confirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Magistrate stated hereinabove. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Revision is filed. 3. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner confine his arguments 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 recorded by both the courts below and the same is confirmed, but however, the sentence of imprisonment inflicted is modified to that of the period already undergone by the petitioner. However, the fine amount paid by the petitioner shall remain unaltered. 6. With the above modification in the sentence, the Criminal Revision is disposed of. ______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO. 01-10-2010 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 9 4 6 OF 2005 Circulation Entry No. 4 0 Date: 01-10-2010 Computer No. 43 Court Master: I s L