Delhi District Court
Sunil Kumar vs The State on 30 April, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SH.SURESH CHAND RAJAN
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE(NDPS)
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
Crl. Appeal No.32/13
Sunil Kumar
S/o Ramesh Kumar
76/45 BlockC
Mayapuri PH.II
New Delhi
.......... Appellant
Versus
The State
........... Respondent
ORDER
The present criminal appeal u/s 374 Cr.PC. has been filed against Order dated 19.03.2013 passed by Sh Santosh Kumar Singh, Ld. MM (Traffic) while disposing of challan no.39738485 against vehicle no. DL 3SALl 0736 thereby convicting the accused/appellant u/s 185, 146/196 & 130/177 MV Act and sentenced him to suffer SI for 10 days and to pay fine of Rs.2000/ u/s 185 MV Act, fine of Rs.1000/ u/s 146/196 MV, Rs.100 u/s 130/177 MV Act has also been imposed and in default of payment of fine to further undergo SI for 5 days.
Sunil Kumar Vs. The State CA NO. 32/13 Page No.1 of 5
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. 39738485 on the allegation that on 14.03.2013 Opp Maya Enclave, Mayapuri, New Delhi at about 8.10 p.m, the appellant was driving vehicle no.DL 2SAL 0736 in drunken condition. The content of the alcohol was tested through breath alcohol analyser instrument and it was found to be 370.5mg/100 ml. The appellant was challaned and he was directed to appear before the Ld. Trial Court. On 19.03.2013 the appellant appeared before Ld. Trial court and he voluntarily pleaded his guilt. Therefore, Ld. MM convicted him for the offence punishable u/s 185, 146/196 & 130/177 MV Act. 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 17.04.2013. After hearing the arguments, the sentence of appellant was suspended & he was admitted to bail. The trial court Sunil Kumar Vs. The State CA NO. 32/13 Page No.2 of 5 record was received and thereafter I have heard the arguments from the Ld. Counsel for the appellant as well as Ld. APP for the State.
4. During the course of arguments Ld. Counsel for the appellant has argued that the conviction is bad in law and the sentence is too excessive. It is submitted that the appellant has pleaded his guilt in normal course of proceedings without knowing his right of trial. It is submitted that appellant is not a previous convict and no other case is pending against him. It is submitted that the appellant is a young boy and having responsibility of his entire family consisting of his parents. The appellant is a first offender and has no criminal history. 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 the order passed by the Ld. Trial court.
6. In consideration of the submissions made by Ld. APP 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 his guilt in this case. The fine imposed i.e. Rs.3100/ has Sunil Kumar Vs. The State CA NO. 32/13 Page No.3 of 5 already been paid. The appellant has prayed for setting aside the order for suffering SI for 10 days.
7. In view of above, I have also perused the file. Keeping in view the facts & circumstances of the case & antecedents of the appellant, it would meet the ends of justice if the appellant is given an opportunity to mend himself and to learn the norms of civic society. Accordingly, the SI of 10 days awarded to appellant is modified and now the appellant is directed to report to the DCP (Traffic), South West District, New Delhi at his office at 9 a.m in the morning who will depute him to assist the traffic police officials on duty at any busy traffic red light under his jurisdiction in managing/diverting traffic from 10 a.m to 5 p.m for Five Days w.e.f. 01.05.2013 to 05.05.2013. Notice to DCP (Traffic), South West District, New Delhi be issued alongwith copy of this Judgment for compliance of the order. DCP is directed to submit the report to the Ld. Trial court after completion of 5 days period. Ld. Trial court is directed to get execute the above order and comply the same.
8. With these modifications, the appeal of the appellant is partly allowed. The trial court file be sent back with the copy of this order Sunil Kumar Vs. The State CA NO. 32/13 Page No.4 of 5 for information and further action and appeal file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the Open Court on 30.04.2013 (SURESH CHAND RAJAN) ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE/ SPECIAL JUDGE(NDPS) NEW DELHI Sunil Kumar Vs. The State CA NO. 32/13 Page No.5 of 5