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.

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 succumbed to the injuries. Police after conducting investigation filed charge sheet and the same was taken on file as C.C.No.178 of 2008 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru.

3. The prosecution examined PW.1 to PW.11 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P12. On behalf of the accused, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced.

4. The trial Court convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 304-A of IPC and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six (06) months, sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one (01) month for the offence under Section 338 IPC and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/-in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days for the offence under Section 337 IPC.

5. Against the said impugned judgment, the revision petitioner/accused preferred an appeal before the lower Appellate Court, but the same was dismissed by confirming the trial Court’s judgment.

6. Being aggrieved, the present revision has been filed by the petitioner/accused.

7. Heard Smt. D.Sangeetha Reddy, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri Dheera Kanishka, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.

8. Now the point that arises for determination in this revision is “whether there is any illegality or impropriety in the sentence imposed by the trial Court as confirmed by the Sessions Court?”

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no rash and negligent driving on the part of the lorry driver and the witnesses did not speak about the rash and negligent driving of the accused. He further submits that there is also failure of identification of the accused as driver of the crime vehicle. It is also further submits that no test identification parade is conducted and identification for the first time in Court is of no significance. The accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto, the auto turned turtle and hit the road side tree. Due to which, the passengers in the auto sustained injuries and one person died.

10. Learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 4 who are injured persons and inmates of the auto in one voice deposed in their evidence about the rash and negligence driving of the lorry, and identified the accused, resulting which the accident occurred. The evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 4 is trustworthy basing on the same the Trial Court as well as the Sessions Court has rightly convicted the accused for the said offences.

11. In view of the above rival contentions, this Court perused the entire material available on record. Coming to the case of the prosecution, on 19.05.2006, at about 02.00 a.m