IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V. Ravindra Babu, J.
Sk.Bajee - Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Revision Case No. 2493 of 2011
Decided On : 04-03-2024
Conviction - Indian Penal Code - Sections 337, 304-A - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a fatal accident caused by the accused, who was driving a lorry in a rash and negligent manner, resulting in the death of a person and injuries to others. The trial court and the Additional Sessions Judge found the accused guilty and confirmed the conviction and sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including eyewitness testimonies and documentary evidence, established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court also noted that the accused's surrender and the production of records pertaining to the offending vehicle further supported the prosecution's case.
Issues: The key issue was whether the judgment of the lower courts was sustainable in law and facts, and whether there were grounds to interfere with the same.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence, including eyewitness testimonies, documentary evidence, and the accused's surrender and production of records, established the guilt of the accused under Sections 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The Criminal Revision Case was dismissed, confirming the judgment of the lower courts. The trial court was directed to carry out the sentence imposed against the accused.
ORDER
A.V. Ravindra Babu, J. - Challenge in this Criminal Revision Case is to the judgment, dated 16.12.2011 in Criminal Appeal No.195 of 2010, on the file of III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kakinda ('Additional Sessions Judge' for short), whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge, dismissed the Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant confirming the conviction and sentence under Sections 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) in C.C.No.158 of 2008, on the file of Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Peddapuram ('Magistrate' for short), dated 08.06.2010.
2. The parties to this Criminal Revision Case will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, according to the charge sheet in Crime No.47 of 2008 of Gandepalli Police Station, is that the accused is resident of Pitchaiah Street, Labbipeta, Vijayawada. He had valid driving license to drive the heavy motor vehicles. He was the driver of Lorry A.P.16-TV-1345 (hereinafter will be referred to as 'offending vehicle'). On 15.04.2008 at about 10.00 p.m., L.W.1-Gunimakala Venkateswarlu, one Sagi Suribabu, S/o Satyanarayana, 22 years (hereinafter will be referred to as 'deceased') and L.W.8-Gollapalli Durgayya, were coming to Borrampalem village from Talluru Village on their respective bicycles. At about 10-30 p.m., they reached outskirts of Borrampalem village on National Highway 5 road, near to the Electrical Sub-Station. At that time, the accused being the driver of the offending vehicle, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner at high speed while proceeding to Jaggampeta towards Rajahmundry side and dashed them from backside. On account of the said accident, they all fell down on the road with bicycles. The deceased received severe crushed injury on his head and died on the spot. L.W.8 was dragged to some distance and he received bleeding injuries on his person. Later, he was shifted to GSL Hospital, Rajahmundry, in 108 Ambulance and he was admitted in the hospital. The complainant received simple ruptured injuries. On the basis of a report from the complainant, a case in Crime No.47 of 2008 was registered and investigated into on 16.04.2008 at 1-30 a.m. During the course of investigation, L.W.15-N. Ramarao, Head Constable 1854 of Gandepalli Police Station, visited the scene of offence and inspected the same in the presence of L.W.9-Pusuluri Vishanadha Rao and L.W.10-Pallapu Satyanarayana, the mediators. He got drafted observation report and photographed the scene in different angles with the help of L.W.7-P. Suribabu, Photographer. He prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence. He held inquest over the dead body of the deceased and examined the statements of the witnesses and blood relatives. He forwarded the dead body for post mortem to Government Hospital, Peddapuram.
4. While so, on 19.04.2008 morning at 8-00 a.m., the accused surrendered before L.W.16-A. Rambabu, Sub-Inspector of Police, Gandepalli Police Station, introduced himself that he is working as a driver on the offending lorry and admitted his guilt relating to the accident that took on N.H.5 road on 15.04.2008 at 10.30 p.m. and produced the record pertaining to the offending vehicle and his driving license. After verifying his identity, L.W.16 arrested the accused at 8-30 a.m. after informing the grounds of arrest. He verified the records pertaining to the offending vehicle and sent him to the remand. L.W.12-V.S. Janakiramam, Asst. Motor Vehicle Inspector, Rajahmundry, inspected the offending vehicle, seized the original driving license of the accused and issued a report stating that the accident occurred is not due to any mechanical defects in the offending vehicle. L.W.13-Dr. M. Ashok Kumar, Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Peddapuram, conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued post mortem report stating that the death was due to multiple injuries with shock.
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 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....
The prosecution must prove the identity of the accused and elements of rash and negligent driving beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so results in acquittal.
The court affirmed the conviction for negligent driving resulting in death, establishing that the accused's recklessness was the primary cause of the victim's fatal injuries.
The case underscores the obligations of drivers to exercise due care and the legal implications of failing to adhere to traffic regulations, leading to serious consequences.
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.