Gurcharan Singh vs State of Punjab

S.S. Grewal, J.—Gurcharan Singh petitioner was convicted u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. in default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. He was further convicted u/s 279 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month. The petitioner was also convicted u/s 337 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs 300/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month and 15 days. He was further convicted u/s 338 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months vide order of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nabha dated 6.5.1993. All the substantive sentences of imprisonment were to run concurrently. On appeal filed by the petitioner, the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide his order dated 23.10.1993 upheld the order of conviction passed by the Trial Magistrate. Sentence of imprisonment passed by the Trial Magistrate u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for two years to rigorous imprisonment for nine months and sentence of fine was maintained. In default of payment of fine, the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for six months to rigorous imprisonment for two months. u/s 279 of the Indian Penal Code sentence of imprisonment was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for six months to rigorous imprisonment for three months. The sentence of fine or in default thereof was, however, maintained. u/s 337 of the Indian Penal Code, the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for six months to rigorous imprisonment for three months. The sentence of fine was maintained. However, in default of payment of fine the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from 1-1/2 months rigorous imprisonment to rigorous imprisonment for one month. Sentence of imprisonment u/s 338 of the Indian Penal Code was reduced from rigorous imprisonment for one year to rigorous imprisonment for six months. The sentence of fine was maintained, but, the sentence in default thereof was, reduced from rigorous imprisonment for three months to rigorous imprisonment for one month. All the substantives sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

Aggrieved against the orders of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below, the petitioner filed the present petition in which notice was issued only regarding the quantum of sentence to be awarded to the petitioner as well as to consider the feasibility of releasing the petitioner on probation.

In brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 19th of June, 1989, Harbans Singh, first informant was taking several passengers in his tempo bearing registration No. PCI 911 from Nabha to Laut. At about 1.30 p.m. that day, as the tempo reached near the link road of village Dhangera on Nabha-Bhadson road, he slowed down his tempo and gave a signal with his right hand indicating that he wanted to turn towards the link road. At that time truck No. HJR 8390 driven by the petitioner at a very high speed rashly and negligently came from behind and struck against the rear side of the tempo, which, hit a small bridge and then came under the truck. As a result of the said accident Hari Singh, Mukand Singh died at the spot whereas numerous other passengers including its driver received injuries. All the injured were removed to Civil Hospital, Nabha in the truck and were got admitted there. On receipt of information from the doctor, ASI Major Singh went to the hospital and recorded the statement of tempo driver Harbans Singh and on its basis formal F.I.R. was subsequently registered at the Police Station. The said ASI inspected the spot and got the scene of accident photographed, prepared inquest reports concerning the dead bodies of Hari Singh Mukhar Singh as these were lying near the place of accident As a result of the injuries during the accident another Hari Singh, Nahar Singh, Nachhattar Kaur and Zora Singh died in the hospital subsequently. The petitioner was arrested. After completion of the investigation, he was challaned, tried, convicted and sentenced as stated earlier.

The learned Counsel for the parties were heard. On behalf of the petitioner it was mainly contended that the petitioner underwent agony of trial for about four years before the Trial Court and his appeal also remained pending for about six months before the Appellate Court and that a lenient view may be taken as there was some contributory negligence on the part of the tempo driver whose tempo was overloaded with about 30 passengers. It was also submitted that he was about 23 years of age at the time of the accident and first offender and he may be released on probation. It has been established on the file that due to the accident which took place mainly due to the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner six persons died whereas some other received serious injuries. Thus in my opinion it is not a fit case to grant benefit of Probation of Offenders'' Act to the petitioner.

Taking into consideration the over all circumstances of the case as well as the fact that the petitioner underwent agony of trial for about four years in the Trial Court and his appeal remained pending for six months before the Appellate Court, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code is reduced from nine months rigorous imprisonment to rigorous imprisonment for six months whereas the sentence of fine or in default thereof is, maintained. The sentence of imprisonment awarded to the petitioner u/s 338 of the Indian Penal Code is reduced from rigorous imprisonment for six months to rigorous imprisonment for three months. The sentence of fine or in default thereof is, however, maintained. The conviction and sentence passed by the Appellate Court with regard to other offences made out against the petitioner is, however, maintained.

Except with this modification, I do not find any merit in this revision and the same is hereby dismissed.