Delhi District Court
State vs Dinesh on 25 March, 2009
1
FIR No. 16/99
IN THE COURT OF SH. J.P. NAHAR, METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, DELHI
FIR NO: 16/99
U/S: 279/304A IPC
P.S: Timar Pur
State V/s Dinesh
ORDER ON SENTENCE
25.3.2009
Present: Ld. APP for the State
Convict in person with Counsel
Vide separate judgment, convict Dinesh has been
convicted for the commission of offence punishable u/s
279/304A IPC.
Arguments on the point of sentence heard.
Record perused.
Ld. APP has argued that accused is liable to be given
maximum punishment for his rash and negligent driving and
causing injuries to the injured.
It is stated by the convict that he is a poor man and is
2
FIR No. 16/99
only bread earner of the family and has small children and has
prayed for a lenient view.
2002 CRI. L.J. 495 State of H.P. Vs. Amar Nath"
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT Corum : 1 ARUN KUMAR
GOEL, J. (Single Bench) It was also urged as an alternative
submission on behalf of the respondent that if the Court comes
to the conclusion that the respondent is guilty of having
committed the offences, keeping in view the time gap he may
be extended the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. This
cannot be done in the light of two decisions of the Hon'ble High
Court reported in Aitha Chander Rao Vs. State of Andhra
Pradesh, 1981 (Supp) SCC 17 and Dalbir Singh Vs. State of
Haryana, AIR 2000 SC 1677: (2000 Cri. L.J. 2283).
1997 CRI. L.J. 4353 "Narendra Singh Vs. State of
Rajasthan" RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT Coram : 1. B.J. SHETHNA, J.
(Single Bench) - Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 304A, S.279 - NEGLIGENCE - Rash and negligent driving - sentence - Concurrent finding that fatal accident caused due to rash and 3 FIR No. 16/99 negligent driving by accused - No interference in revision - Mere pendency of case for last 15 years - Cannot be ground to interfere with order of sentence - Accused neither entitled for benefit of probation nor sentence can be reduced.
In such view of the fact and law the accused do not deserve leniency and he is therefore, sentenced as under:
For the offence u/s 279 IPC, the accused is sentenced to undergo RI for 3 months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine accused to go further SI for two months which be served after serving the first sentence.
For the offence u/s 304A IPC, the accused is sentenced RI for one year and three months and to pay a fine of Rs.7,000/- and in default of payment of fine, accused to go further RI for 6 months.
The sentence of RI in default of payment of fine to run consecutively. All the other sentence shall run concurrently.
At this stage, accused has moved an application u/s 389 CrPC for granting of bail. Heard. Accused is admitted to 4 FIR No. 16/99 bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the like amount for a period of 30 days from tomorrow till 25.4.2009.
(Announced in the open court) Dated: 25.3.2009 (J.P. NAHAR) MM:TIS HAZARI:DELHI