Delhi District Court
Gaurav Sharma vs State Of N.C.T Of Delhi on 22 December, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SH.SURESH CHAND RAJAN
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE(NDPS)
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
Crl. Appeal No.50/14
Gaurav Sharma
S/o Late Sh Laxmi Narain Sharma
RZB5A Dabri East Extn
New Delhi110045
.......... Appellant
Versus
State of N.C.T of Delhi ........... Respondent
ORDER
The present criminal appeal u/s 375 Cr.PC. has been directed against Order dated 27.10.2014 passed by Sh Santosh Kumar Singh, Ld. MM while disposing of challan no.220100245 14 against vehicle no. DL10SA8707 thereby convicting the accused/appellant u/s 185, 115/190.2, 146/196 MV Act, and sentenced him to suffer SI for 05 days and to pay fine of Rs.2000/ u/s 185 MV Act, fine of Rs.1000/ u/s 115/190.2, Rs.1000 u/s 146/196 MV Act and in default of payment of fine to further undergo SI for 02 days. The license of the appellant was also suspended for six months and he was disqualified for driving Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of NCT of Delhi CA NO. 50/14 Page No.1 of 6 motorcycle for six months.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case for giving rise to this present appeal are that the appellant/convict was challaned vide challan no. 22010034514 on the allegation that on 19.09.2014 at Pankha Road, Janak Cinema, the appellant was found driving vehicle no.DL 10SA 8707 in drunken condition. The content of the alcohol was tested through breath alcohol analyser instrument and it was found to be 399.9 mg/100 ml. The appellant was challaned and he was directed to appear before the Ld. Trial Court. On 27.10.2014, the appellant appeared before Ld. Trial court and he voluntarily pleaded his guilt. Therefore, Ld. MM convicted him. After considering the facts of the case, Ld. MM sentenced the appellant as above. The appellant paid the fine before the Ld. Trial court. Thereafter, on an application moved on behalf of the appellant, the sentence was suspended till filing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the said order of sentence, the appellant has preferred this present appeal for setting aside the said order on sentence.
3. The present criminal appeal was received by this court on 25.11.2014. After hearing the arguments, the sentence of appellant was suspended & he was admitted to bail. The trial court record was summoned and received and thereafter I have heard the Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of NCT of Delhi CA NO. 50/14 Page No.2 of 6 arguments from the Ld. Counsel for the appellant as well as Ld. Addl.PP for the State.
4. During the course of arguments, Ld. Counsel for the appellant has argued that the conviction is bad in law. The sentence granted by the Ld. MM is too excessive, exorbitant harsh and severe. It is submitted that the breath analysis test was conducted by inexpert person and that he was not taken to any government hospital. It is submitted that the appellant has pleaded his guilt in normal course of proceedings without knowing his right of trial. It is further submitted that the appellant is the first offender and he undertake not to repeat such offence in future. He is 40 years of age and is only the bread earner in his family consisting of his old and ailing mother, two daughters aged about 8 years and one year and there is none else to look after them. It is further aruged that if the appellant is sent behind bar, irreparable loss would be caused to him. He is driver by profession.It is stated that accused/convict may be given the benefit of probation being first offender. It has been stated that the order passed by the Ld. Trial Court may kindly be set aside.
5. Ld. APP for the State has argued that the Ld. Trial court has passed the order after going through the provision of Law and application of judicious mind. There is no illegality or infirmity in Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of NCT of Delhi CA NO. 50/14 Page No.3 of 6 the order passed by the Ld. Trial court.
6. In consideration of the submissions made by Ld. Addl.PP for the State as well as Ld. Counsel for the appellant, I have also perused the record and relevant provision of Law. The appellant has pleaded guilt in this case. The fine imposed i.e. Rs.4000/ has already been deposited before the Ld. Trial Court. The appellant has prayed for setting aside the order for suffering SI for 20 days. No arguments has been made with regard to suspension of licence/disqualification of appellant from driving motorcycle for six months. However, Regarding disqualification of licence for 6 months, I have also perused the provision of sec.20 MV Act. which contemplates:
20. Power of Court to disqualify: (1) Where a person is convicted of an offence under this Act or of an offence in the commission of which a motor vehicle was used, the court by which such person is convicted may, subject to the provisions of this Act, in addition to imposing any other punishment authorised by law, declare the persons so convicted to be disqualified, for such period as the court may specify, from holding any driving licence to driver all classes or description of vehicles, or any particular class or description of such vehicles, as are specified in such licence:
PROVIDED THAT in respect of an offence punishable u/s 183 no such order shall be made for the first or second offence.
(2) Where a person is convicted of an offence under C1.(c) of sub section (1) of sec. 132, Sec. 134 or Sec. 185, the court convicting any person of any such offence shall order the disqualification under subsection (1), and if the offence is relatable to C1.(c) or Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of NCT of Delhi CA NO. 50/14 Page No.4 of 6 sub section (1) of Sec.132 or Sec. 134, such disqualification shall be for a period of not less than one month and if the offence is relatable to sec. 185, such disqualification shall be for a period of not less than six months.
(3) A court shall unless, for special reasons to be recorded in writing it thinks fit to order otherwise, order the disqualification of a person : (a) who having been convicted of an offence punishable under that section (b) who is convicted of an offence punishable u/s 189 or (c) who is convicted of an offence punishable u/s 192.
(4) A court ordering the disqualification of a person convicted of an offence punishable u/s 184 may direct ............... (5) The court to which an appeal would ordinarily lie from any conviction of an offence of the nature specified in subsection(1) may set aside or vary any order of disqualification made under that subsection notwithstanding that no appeal would lie against the conviction as a result of which such order of disqualification was made.
7. On perusal of the order passed by the Ld. MM, the present appellant had been disqualified from holding driving licence for the period of six months. Considering the provision of MV Act as well as observations of Ld. MM regarding period of disqualification and since no arguments has been advanced in this respect, I am of the view that the period of suspension of licence and disqualification from driving motorcycle is proper. The order passed by the Ld. MM in this respect is maintained.
8. It has been submitted that the appellant is a first Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of NCT of Delhi CA NO. 50/14 Page No.5 of 6 offender and not previous convict. He has no criminal history. He is 40 years of age. He has old age parents, wife and small kids to be looked after as they are dependent upon him. Keeping in view the facts & circumstances of the case & antecedents of the appellant, it would meet the ends of justice if the sentence awarded by the Ld. MM is modified. I, therefore modify the sentence and now the appellant is sentenced to Till Rising the Court for the commission of offence punishable u/s 185 MV Act.
9. With these modifications, the appeal of the appellant is disposed off. The trial court file be sent back with the copy of this order for information and further action and appeal file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the Open Court on 22.12.2014 (SURESH CHAND RAJAN) ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE/ SPECIAL JUDGE(NDPS) NEW DELHI Gaurav Sharma Vs. State of NCT of Delhi CA NO. 50/14 Page No.6 of 6