Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ajeet Singh @ Jit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 11 February, 2014
Author: T.P.S.Mann
Bench: T.P.S.Mann
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRR 2685 of 2013(O&M)
Date of Decision : February 11, 2014
Ajeet Singh @ Jit Singh
.....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN
Present : Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Deputy A.G., Punjab.
T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral)
The petitioner was tried for committing an offence under Section 304-A IPC on the allegations that on 14.4.2007 at about 4.00 p.m., he drove Mini Bus in a rash and negligent manner and struck against the scooter of Surjit Singh as a result of which Surjit Singh fell down and received injuries and while on way to the hospital, he succumbed to the injuries. Vide judgment and order dated 2.7.2011, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kapurthala convicted him for the aforementioned offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of the same, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for four days. The amount of fine imposed was deposited by the petitioner. Aggrieved of his conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed an appeal but remained unsuccessful CRR 2685 of 2013(O&M) -2- as the same was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala vide judgment dated 8.8.2013. Hence, the present revision filed by the petitioner.
The revision came up for preliminary hearing on 27.8.2013 when after hearing counsel for the petitioner, the Court issued notice regarding quantum of sentence only.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been facing the agony of criminal prosecution for the last about seven years. He is not a previous convict and is the sole bread winner of the family. At present, he is 62 years of age. During his stay in jail, he suffered internal bleeding and had to be rushed to Government Medical Hospital, Amritsar for treatment. Out of the sentence of two years imposed upon him, he has already undergone a period of more than six months. Therefore, the remaining sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner be set-aside.
Learned State counsel has submitted that the sentence awarded to the petitioner is commensurate with the crime committed by him as on account of the rash and negligent driving of the bus an innocent user of the road received injuries and died as a result thereof.
Custody certificate has already been brought on record by the State counsel, as per which the petitioner had actually served a period of two months and twenty days as on 28.10.2013. As a period of about 3½ months has passed since the issuance of the CRR 2685 of 2013(O&M) -3- custody certificate and the petitioner continues to remain behind the bars, he has undergone an actual period of more than six months uptil now.
After hearing counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, this Court is of the view that the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner for the offence under Section 304-A IPC is on the higher side and deserves to be reduced. At the same time, the fine imposed upon the petitioner can be enhanced so that the same may be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation.
Resultantly, the conviction of the petitioner under Section 304-A IPC is maintained. His sentence of imprisonment is reduced from two years to rigorous imprisonment for one year. The sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs. 50,000/- and in default thereof, the petitioner shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The entire enhanced amount of fine, on its deposit by the petitioner, be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased, as compensation.
The revision is, accordingly, disposed of.
( T.P.S. MANN )
February 11, 2014 JUDGE
ajay-1
Kumar-I Ajay
2014.02.13 15:34
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh