V. SRINIVAS
Komminti Veera Venkata Satyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
State Of AP Rep by PP – Respondent
ORDER :
V Srinivas, J.
This Revision is arising out of judgment dated 09.05.2012 passed in Crl.A.No.60 of 2010 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, wherein the learned Judge has dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence imposed against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 304-A, 338 and 337 IPC in the judgment dated 26.02.2010 in C.C.No.178 of 2008 passed by the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru.
2. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that: on 19.05.2006 at about 02.00 a.m., the accused who is the driver of lorry bearing No.AP 37 W 6679 drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and by the time they reached near Surya Mineral Water Plant, the lorry dashed against the auto rickshaw bearing No.AP 37 W 50. As a result, the deceased and PW.1 to PW.4, who were traveling in the said auto as passengers sustained severe injuries and they were shifted to the Government Head Quarters Hospital, Eluru. Basing on the compliant of PW.1, a case in crime No.76 of 2006 has been registered for the offence punishable under Sections 338 and 337 IPC. While undergoing treatment, the deceased s
Jagdish Chander v. State of Delhi
Nand Ballabh Pant v. State (Union Territory of Delhi) AIR 1977 SC 892
The court upheld the conviction for negligent driving resulting in death but reduced the sentence from six months to three months based on mitigating circumstances.
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 court confirmed the conviction for causing death by negligence under Section 304-A IPC, emphasizing the driver's duty of care and reducing the sentence from six to three months based on mitigatin....
The court affirmed that credible eyewitness testimony can establish guilt in negligence cases, and concurrent findings by lower courts are generally upheld unless proven otherwise.
The High Court's role in revision limits reassessment of evidence and focuses on legality, confirming that undue sympathy in sentencing can undermine the judicial system's integrity.
The court upheld the conviction for causing death and injuries due to negligent driving, affirming the lower courts' findings while reducing the sentence from six to three months based on mitigating ....
Rash and negligent driving resulting in death constitutes offences under IPC, affirming convictions and allowing sentence reduction based on mitigating circumstances.
Convictions upheld on grounds of negligence in fatal accident; sentencing modified for proportionality based on circumstances.
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 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.
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.