Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dr. Y. Lakshmana Rao, J
Puttam Sambasiva Rao S/o Venkateshwara Rao – Appellant
Versus
State of A.P. Represented by its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
Y. Lakshmana Rao, J.
This Revision was directed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C .,’) against the judgment in Crl.A.No.342 of 2010 dated 07.12.2010 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge-Cum-Judge, Family Court, Guntur, whereunder the Revisionist was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Sections 304-A and 338 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the I.P.C.,’) The learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri, found the Revisionist guilty vide judgment dated 01.07.2010 in C.C.No.312 of 2005.
2. On the following material grounds the Revision was preferred:
P.Ws.1 to 4 have no previous acquaintance with the Revisionist; no test identification parade was conducted identifying the Revisionist as a person who drove the offending vehicle; non-examination of the driver of the auto bearing No.AP16 X 7348 i.e., L.W.7 who was the independent witness to speak against the Revisionist. The vehicle in question was travelling with excess passengers beyond its permissible capacity. The Defacto-complainant himself lost control of the auto and the auto might have tilted which led to the death and injuries of the passen
The court upheld the conviction for causing death by negligence, emphasizing the reliability of eyewitness testimony and the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction.
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 court affirmed the conviction for negligent driving, emphasizing that revisional jurisdiction should not disturb concurrent findings unless there is a manifest injustice.
The court confirmed the conviction for negligence under Section 304-A IPC but reduced the sentence from one year rigorous imprisonment to three months simple imprisonment due to the Revisionist's age....
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 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 causing death but reduced the sentence to one month, considering mitigating circumstances and the time elapsed since the incident.
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
