Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V. RAVINDRA BABU, J.
Shaik Chand Basha S/o Khasi – Petitioner
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Revision Case No. 1888 of 2008
Decided On : 09-05-2023
Criminal Revision Case - Conviction under Section 304-A IPC - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - [Sections 397, 401] - [304-A IPC] - The court discussed the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies, and the conduct of the accused. The court analyzed the legality, regularity, and propriety of the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 2007, and found no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the accused under Section 304-A IPC for causing the death of a person in a road accident. The prosecution presented evidence including witness testimonies and reports to establish the guilt of the accused. The accused denied the allegations and did not present any defense evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had convincingly established the involvement of the accused as the driver of the offending vehicle at the time of the accident. The court noted the conduct of the accused, including absconding from the process of law, and declined to reduce the term of imprisonment due to the accused's age.
Issues: The key issue was whether the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 2007 was sustainable in terms of legality, regularity, and propriety.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies and reports, to establish the guilt of the accused. The court also considered the conduct of the accused, including absconding from the process of law, in reaching its decision.
Final Decision: The Criminal Revision Case was dismissed, and the court declined to reduce the term of imprisonment for the accused.
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Case, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C’) is filed by the petitioner, who was the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 2007, on the file of the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur (for short ‘the learned Additional Sessions Judge’), challenging the judgment therein, dated 17.12.2008, whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge, dismissed the Criminal Appeal, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed against the accused in Calendar Case No. 213 of 2006, dated 31.07.2007, on the file of the Court of I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tenali (for short ‘the trial Court’) for the offence under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’).
2. The parties to this Criminal Revision Case will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience.
3. The State, represented by Station House Officer, III Town Police Station, Tenali filed charge sheet in Crime No. 89 of 2006 for the offence under Section 304-A against the accused alleging in substance that the offence took place on Cherukupalli - Vijayawada State High Way near Sri Anjaneyaswamy Temple of Tenali III Town Police Station limits. LW-1 - Narumanchi Sasank is the second son of the deceased and a direct witness to the occurrence. On 12.04.2006 afternoon at 01:00 p.m. both the deceased i.e. Narumanchi Lakshminarayana and LW-1 started on separate bicycles to go to their house via old bridge. The deceased was proceeding ahead of LW-1. On their way, after passing Anjaneyaswamy Temple, accused being driver of the Lorry bearing No. AP31U2113 came behind the deceased at high speed in a rash and negligent manner, without blowing any horn and dashed against the cyclist deceased. As a result, the deceased fell down and sustained injuries. LW-1, second son of the deceased and LWs. 4 to LW-8 i.e. Ganisetti Malleswari, Matlapudi George, Veddu Srinivas, Akkala Nageswara Rao and Shaik Basha witnessed the occurrence. LW-1 shifted the deceased to the Hospital of LW-9 - Dr. K. Padmanabhaiah and admitted him in the Hospital for treatment. While undergoing treatment, the deceased died at 03:00 p.m. on the same day. Then, LW-1 turned to the Police Station and presented a report to LW-16 - ASI, who registered the FIR and took up investigation. During investigation, LW-16 visited the scene of offence in the presence of mediators i.e. LW-11 - Sistla Muralikrishna and LW-13 - Bhagavathula Ramakrishna. On 12.04.2006 at 03:30 p.m. LW-16 got prepared the observation report. He also prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence. Thereafter, LW-16 proceeded to the hospital of LW-9 and, in the presence of panchayatdars and blood relatives, conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased from 05:00 to 07:00 p.m. Thereafter, he forwarded the dead body for post-mortem examination. During investigation, he examined LWs.6 to LW-9 and also examined LW-10 - Valuvole Tandavakrishna, owner of the offending vehicle. LW-14 - Dr. K. Hema, Medical Officer, conducted autopsy over the dead body and opined that the death was due to shock and hemorrhage due to multiple injuries. LW-15 - K.G.K. Raju, Motor Vehicle Inspector (MVI), Tenali inspected the crime vehicle and issued accident report opining that the accident was not due to any mechanical defect of the crime vehicle. LW-16 arrested the accused on 19.04.2006 and sent him for remand. Hence, the charge-sheet.
4. The learned jurisdictional Magistrate, Tenali took cognizance of the case under the above provision of law. After appearance of the accused and after complying the necessary formalities under Section 207 Cr.P.C. accused was examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C. with reference to the allegations in the case of prosecution, for which he denied the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. To bring home the guilt against the accused, the prosecution before the Court be
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....
On account of delay in recording statement of witness by Police, case of prosecution cannot be thrown out.
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 is the reliance on consistent witness testimony and documentary evidence to establish the accused's involvement in the offence, leading to the Court's decision to uph....
Negligence in driving leading to fatality can be established without a test identification parade if the identity is corroborated by credible witnesses.
The court upheld the conviction for negligent driving causing death but reduced the sentence to one month, considering mitigating circumstances and the time elapsed since the incident.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
