NAGALLA RAYAPA Vs. STATE OF A. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioner is a driver of a city bus. He was found guilty for the offence under Sec. 304-A I.P.C. and was convicted and sentenced to suffer Simple Imprisonment for one year and pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00 with a default sentence of Simple Imprisonment for four months. His driving licence was ordered to be cancelled for a period of two years. This was the judgment of learned IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur in C.C. No. 338 of 2007 by its judgment dtd. 11/7/2008. This revision petitioner questioned the correctness of it in his Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 2008. That was duly heard and decided by learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur by a judgment dtd. 17/4/2009. Learned Additional Sessions Judge agreed with the trial Court findings on all aspects and dismissed the appeal. Questioning the legality of it, the present revision is filed under Ss. 397 and 401 Cr. P.C. stating that identity of him as a driver was not established and negligence attributed to him was also not established by evidence, yet erroneous findings were recorded by both the Courts below. The conclusions reached were arbitrary and sought for his acquittal by upsetting the impugned judgments.

(2.) By an order dtd. 3/6/2009 in Crl.R.C.M.P. No. 437 of 2009 this Court ordered suspension of execution of sentence and released him on bail. Thereafter this matter was listed for hearing on several occasions but there was no representation for revision petitioner. In terms of Sec. 403 Cr. P.C. this Court proceeded further. For respondent-State, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that the findings of both the Courts below are correct on facts and the judgments rendered by them do not deserve any interference.

(3.) Considering the material on record the point that falls for consideration is: