IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V. RAVINDRA BABU, J.
RAGATI HARI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP REP BY ITS PP HYD. – Respondent
Criminal Revision Case No.903 of 2008
Decided on : 24-11-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304-A - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 397, 401, 313 - Criminal Appeal - Vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and caused death - Causing death by negligence - Cause of death is respiratory - Calling for records to exercise powers of revision - Whether evidence adduced by prosecution before trial Court would establish identity of accused that he was rider of offending vehicle at time of incident and if so whether he drove vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and caused death of deceased - Held, Court of considered view that sentence imposed against Revision Petitioner before trial Court which was confirmed by appellate Court in Criminal Appeal is not liable to be interfered with and court see no reason to reduce said sentence of imprisonment - Court of considered view that judgment in Criminal Appeal , on file of I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, does not suffers with any illegality, irregularity and impropriety, as such, the Criminal Revision Case must fail - Criminal Revision is dismissed.
ORDER :
This is a Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code (“Cr.P.C.” for short), challenging the judgment in Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2007, dated 23.06.2008, on the file of I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, where under the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the Criminal Appeal filed by the petitioner, confirming the judgment in C.C.No.35 of 2006, dated 01.02.2007, on the file of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.
2. The petitioner faced the trial under Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code (“I.P.C.” for short) in C.C.No.35 of 2006, dated 01.02.2007 and in the said case, the learned II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, found the petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 304-A of I.P.C. and after questioning the him, sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for six months.
3. The parties to this Criminal Revision Case will hereinafter be referred as described before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience.
4. The State, represented by Sub-Inspector of Police, II Town Traffic Police Station, Visakhapatnam, filed charge sheet in Crime No.3 of 2006 of II Town Traffic Police Station, Visakhapatnam, alleging in substance as follows:
(ii) On 06.01.2006 at 7-00 P.M., accused being rider of Yamaha Rx 100 Motorcycle bearing No.A.P.31B 4110, driven the same in a rash and negligent manner while coming from Ramakrishna junction towards Dolphin Junction. With the motorbike, he dashed the pedestrian (deceased) while crossing the road near Ramakrishna Theatre, Kobbarithota, Visakhapatnam. Then the deceased fell on the road and sustained injuries and blood oozed out from the ear and nose. He was shifted to King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam for treatment on 07.01.2006 in unconscious state. While undergoing treatment, he succumbed to injuries at the hospital on 09.01.2006 at 2-00 P.M.
(iii) L.W.11, Head Cosntable-436 recorded the statement of L.W.1 and forwarded the same to L.W.12. Originally, L.W.12 registered a case in Crime No.3 of 2006 under Section 337 of I.P.C. and investigated into. He examined the scene of offence and prepared rough sketch and examined the witnesses. After the death of deceased, section of law was altered into Section 304-A of IPC. Inquest was held over the dead body of the deceased on 10.01.2006 during the course of investigation. Later, the body was referred for postmortem examination to the Professor, Forensic Medicine, Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam. The Assistant Professor of Forensic Medicine, Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam, conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued postmortem certificate, opining that he died due to Respiratory and circulatory failure due to injury to skull bone, injury to brain due to “Head Injury”. L.W.12, the investigating officer, arrested the accused on 12.01.2006 at 12-00 noon and sent him for judicial remand. The Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, Visakhapatnam, inspected the crime vehicle and issued a report, opining that the accident was not due to any mechanical defects of the vehicle. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet is laid.
(iv) The learned II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, took the case on file unde
On account of delay in recording statement of witness by Police, case of prosecution cannot be thrown out.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on prosecution evidence, including witness testimonies and reports, to establish the guilt of the accused under Section 304-A IPC.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the assessment of evidence to determine the accused's culpability for driving in a rash and negligent manner, leading to a fatal accident and i....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimonies and documentary evidence, must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonab....
The court confirmed that party negligence resulting in death is a breach of statutory duty under Section 304-A IPC, as supported by eyewitness testimony and accident investigation findings.
Conviction for causing death due to negligence was overturned due to unreliable eyewitness accounts and failure to properly admit key evidentiary documents.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.