THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.931 of 2024

ORDER

Heard Mrs.Srilatha, learned counsel, representing Sri Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri E.Ganesh, learned assistant public prosecutor representing learned public prosecutor for the State/

respondent.

2. Challenge in this criminal revision case, filed under Sections 438 & 442 BNSS and Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C, is to the order dated 25.06.2024 passed in Crl.MP No.3376 of 2023 in SC No.366 of 2023 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad wherein and where under the prayer of the petitioner herein/accused No.3 and accused No.2 for their discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. was rejected.

3. SC No.366 of 2023 is a case registered for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and rash driving in drunken condition with abetment punishable under Sections 304(II), 201 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 185 of MV Act against the petitioner/A3 and two others. The predominant allegation against the accused is that on the intervening night of 5/6.12.2021 at about 1.30 am., while accused No.1 was driving his car in a drunken condition, while accused Nos.2 and 3 sat in the said car even knowing that accused No.1 was in drunken condition and he should not drive the vehicle, which may cause endanger to harm accused No.1 as well as to accused Nos.2 and 3 and any other person on the road, accused No.1 drove the car and proceeded towards KBR Park from Panjagutta in high speed and when they reached near Road No.2, Banjara Hills in front of White Crow Clothing Shop, accused No.1 dashed two pedestrians, who were crossing the road due to which, the pedestrians fell down on the other side of the road and the accused Nos.2 and 3 encouraged accused No.1 to flee away from the spot. Accordingly, basing on the complaint lodged by one Ram Pravesh, uncle of one of the victim/deceased viz.Ayodhya Rai, complaining that the driver of Porsche car bearing No.TS 08 HR 3344 hit his nephew and his friend viz. Debendra Kumar in a rash and negligent manner due to which by sustaining serious injuries they both died on the spot and the said driver fled away from the spot, Crime No.900 of 2021 dated 06.12.2021 was registered by the Police of Banjara Hills.

Upon conclusion of investigation, a charge-sheet was laid.

4. During the course of proceedings before the trial Court, the accused Nos.2 and 3 filed Crl.MP No.3376 of 2023 in SC No.366 of 2023 under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking their discharge from the said case mainly contending that there is no evidence against accused Nos.2 and 3 and furthermore to allege that they have abetted accused No.1 either to fled away from scene or to screen the evidence and that they were only inmates of the vehicle, there was no common intention to cause the alleged incident and that there is no prima- facie case made out against them. Further, they are not responsible for the accident, they did not drive the vehicle and that mere travelling with somebody, who drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner in a drunken condition, does not make them liable for the accident caused by the driver as there was no common intention to commit such offence and that the accident occurred in the spur of moment. Conducting trial against accused Nos.2 and 3 is nothing but a futile exercise since there is no prima-facie case established against them. 5. The respondent/State vehemently opposed the said application mainly contending that there is ample evidence against the accused proving the presence of the accused persons at the scene of offence and their involvement in the incident, after collecting ample evidence only the charge-sheet has been laid and that the petitioners failed to produce any evidence to substantiate their claim of discharge, full-fledged trial only would reveal the true set of facts and that the investigation done by the investigating officer revealed a prima-facie ca