Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38218 (AP)

KUNAPUREDDY VIJAY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/10299/2022 · 2025-02-04

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010703172022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10299/2022 Between: Kunapureddy Vijay Kumar ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10299/2022 ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused No.2, seeking quashment of the proceedings, pending against him in C.C.No.619 of 2018 on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, at Mangalagiri. 2. Heard Sri Shaik Md. Umar Abdullah, learned Counsel representing Sri S.V.S.S. Siva Ram, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. Notice is served on the respondent No.2. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that a case has been registered in Crime No. 143 of 2017 against Accused No.1 who was the Driver of the vehicle at the time of the incident. It is the case of the complainant that her husband died due to the rash and negligent driving of the offence vehicle who is Accused No.1. Learned counsel would further submit that Accused No.2 herein is the owner of the vehicle. Learned counsel would submit that Section 181 of Motor Vehicles Act, has no application to the facts of the present case against Accused No.2 who is the owner of the vehicle. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate Orders regarding the Section 181. 3 5. Coming to the offence under Sections 180 and 181 of The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Sections read as follows: Section 180. Allowing unauthorized persons to drive vehicles Whoever, being the owner or person in charge of a motor vehicle, causes or permits, any other person who does not satisfy the provisions of section 3 or section 4 to drive the vehicle shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine [of five thousand rupees], or with both. Section181. Driving vehicles in contravention of section 3 or section 4.– Whoever drives a motor vehicle in contravention of section 3 or section 4 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine [of five thousand rupees], or with both. 6. Considering the submissions made and on a fair look at the material placed on record, Accused No.2 who is the owner of the vehicle is not vicariously liable for the alleged offence under Section 304A of IPC along with Accused No.1. The fact remains that being an owner, he is alleged to have given his vehicle to Accused No.1 who was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident. In that case, prima facie, the allegations against Accused No.2 are only for the offence are under Section 180 of Motor Vehicles Act. Coming to Section 181 of Motor Vehicles Act, as rightly put by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, it has no application to Accused No.2 since he was not driving the vehicle at the time of the incident. 7. In that view, the petition is partly allowed, quashing the criminal proceedings against Accused No.2 for the offence under Section 181 of Motor Vehicles Act. The criminal proceedings may proceed against Accused No.2 4 for the offence under Section 180 of Motor Vehicles Act. However, the presence of the petitioner/Accused No.2 before the Trial Court is dispensed with unless his presence is specifically directed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 04.02.2025 UPS 5 93 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.10299 of 2022 Dt.04.02.2025 UPS