GANDIPALLY SRINIVAS Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision case is filed challenging the judgment dated 22. 12. 2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2002 by the learned Sessions Judge, karimnagar, confirming the judgment dated 01. 04. 2002 passed by the learned additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar, in C. C. No. 1115 of 1999, whereby and whereunder the revision petitioner/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC and sentenced to undergo R. I for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to undergo S. I for two months. In the appeal, though conviction was confirmed, however the sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment was reduced to one year but imposition of fine amount of Rs. 2000/- was confirmed.

(2.) THE petitioner will be referred as accused hereinafter. The brief facts of the case are as follows. The deceased Thota Thirupathi, aged about 18 years, was a resident of Maruthinagar, Karimnagar. A Ganesh idol was installed near Hanuman Temple, Maruthinagar, Karimnagar. On 21. 09. 1999, the deceased and his elder brother Thota Laxman (PW. 1) went to Hanuman Temple to perform pooja to Ganesh idol and they were standing in front of the temple. In the meanwhile, the lorry bearing No. ABT-338, being driven by the accused from kaman side towards Karkhanagadda side in a rash and negligent manner at high speed, came to the extreme left side of the road and dashed against the deceased. The deceased jumped and fell down and the front tyre of the lorry ran over the abdomen of the deceased and also dragged him to a distance of 5 meters, due to which the intestines of the deceased came out and his private parts were also crushed. The persons gathered there witnessed the incident. According to pw. 1, the lorry left the black top road and dashed the deceased. The deceased was shifted to Government Hospital, Karimnagar. However, the deceased succumbed to injuries.

(3.) PW. 1 proceeded to the police station and lodged Ex. P1 report. PW. 2 Thota srinivas is another brother of the deceased. He has not witnessed the accident. PWs. 3 to 5 are the eye-witnesses to the incident. PW. 6 is the mediator at the time of observation of scene of offence by the police. Ex. P2 is the observation of scene of offence panchanama. PW. 7 is one of the mediators at the time of inquest held over the dead body of the deceased. PW. 8 is another mediator at the time of observation of scene of offence. PW. 9 is the Doctor who conducted post-mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased and opined that the deceased died due to haemorrhage and shock due to multiple injuries. Ex. P4 is the post-mortem report issued by PW. 9. PW. 10 is the Motor Vehicle Inspector who inspected the vehicle and submitted his report opining that the accident is not due to any mechanical defect of the vehicle. Ex. P5 is the report given by pw. 10. PW. 11 is the Doctor who examined the deceased and declared the death of the deceased. The Investigating Officer could not be examined in this case. The trial Court believed the evidence of PWs. 1 and 3 to 5 the eye witnesses and held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the accused. The trial Court also observed that since the Investigating Officer had been to USA on extraordinary leave for four years, he could not be examined. The police filed Xerox copy of orders of the Additional Superintendent of police, Karimnagar, showing that the Investigating Officer went to USA on extraordinary leave. The learned Magistrate found the accused guilty and convicted and sentenced as referred above.