Back
V R K KRUPA SAGAR
Jangam Anand Raju – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER:
1. The sole accused in S.C.No.146 of 2018 preferred this criminal revision under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC impugning the order dated 01.12.2023 of learned Judge, Family Court – cum – VII Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in Crl.M.P.No.555 of 2018 in S.C.No.146 of 2018. By the impugned order, the prayer made by the revision petitioner to discharge him was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
2. Respondent herein is the State.
3. Kumari S.Amulya, the learned counsel representing Sri G.Ronald Raju for petitioner and Kumari Disha Chowdary, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent/State submitted arguments.
4. The revision petitioner is owner cum driver of Scorpio car bearing registration No. WB 40 AD 1418. It is alleged that on 24.12.2017 at about 8:30 AM on NH16 of Kurellagudem Village of West Godavari District, the revision petitioner/accused drove his vehicle at high speed, rashly or negligently and with a careless attitude and in a jig jag manner and dashed a truck auto bearing registration No. AP 37 TB 3171 proceeding in the same direction and then dashed a motor cycle which was yet to be registered and then hit another motor cy
The court clarified that charges under Section 304(ii) IPC require specific evidence of culpable homicide, which was not established, allowing for lesser charges.
The court affirmed the conviction for negligent driving, emphasizing that revisional jurisdiction should not disturb concurrent findings unless there is a manifest injustice.
Concurrent findings of guilty must be upheld unless glaring defects are present or a miscarriage of justice occurs; professional drivers may not qualify for probation under Section 304-A IPC.
The prosecution must establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's driving was rash or negligent to uphold a conviction under Section 304(A) IPC.
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 scope of revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is limited to addressing manifest errors or legal bar against proceedings, emphasizing that revisional courts cannot review evidence as appellate court....
The court held that concurrent findings of two lower courts regarding negligence and causation in a motor vehicle accident are binding unless proven erroneous, reinforcing limitations on the scope of....
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
