Back
A. V. RAVINDRA BABU
G. Somasekhar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of A P, Through Inspector of Police Rep By Pp Hyd – Respondent
ORDER
A.V Ravindra Babu, J. - Challenge in this Criminal Revision Case is to the judgment in Criminal Appeal No.1 of 2012, dated 03.02.2012, on the file of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur (for short, 'the learned Additional Sessions Judge') whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the Criminal Appeal, filed by the appellant/accused, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed against him in Calendar Case No.133 of 2007, dated 04.11.2011, on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Penukonda, Ananthapur District (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 case of the prosecution, in brief, as averred in the charge sheet filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Gorantla PS in Crime No.101 of 2006, for the offences under Sections 337, 338 and 304-A of IPC, is that accused is resident of Reddicheruvupalli village of Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. He was the driver of Diesel Auto bearing registration No.AP
The main legal point established is that rash and negligent driving leading to death and injuries can result in conviction under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code.
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.
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 upheld the conviction for causing death by negligence under Section 304-A IPC, affirming that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite the absence of an identification p....
The court upheld the conviction for negligent driving resulting in death, affirming the sufficiency of evidence while reducing the sentence to one year based on mitigating circumstances.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the identity of the driver and the act of rash and negligent driving, emphasizing the distinction betw....
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
