Karnail Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J.—Matter was taken up at 10.00 a.m. On 26.3.2004, petitioner (accused) was found to have committed offences, punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code, regarding which FIR No. 75/04, dated 26.3.2004 (Ex. PW7A) was recorded at Police Station Sadar, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh. Police investigated the matter, which revealed that petitioner was guilty of having committed the aforesaid offences. Challan was presented in the Court for trial and notice of accusation was put to the petitioner for having committed offences, punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

In order to establish its case, prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses and statement of the accused, u/s 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also recorded, in which he pleaded false implication and stated that the accident took place on account of mechanical defect in the vehicle.

Appreciating the material on record, Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba, in terms of judgment dated 16.2.2005, in Criminal Case No. 186-II of 2004, titled as State of H.P. v. Karnail Singh, convicted the petitioner (accused Karnail Singh) and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 5,000 for offence u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code; simple imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs. 500/- for offence u/s 337 of the Indian Penal Code; and simple imprisonment for a period of six months and fine of Rs. 500 for offence u/s 337 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine the petitioner (accused) has been ordered to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months, one month and 15 days for offences under Sections 304A, 337 and 279 of the Indian Penal Code, respectively.

Petitioner-accused assailed the same by filing an appeal. But however, such findings of fact and judgment of conviction were upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Chamba, in terms of judgment dated 20.9.2005, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2005, titled as Karnail Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh. However, sentence with respect to offence punishable u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code has been reduced from simple imprisonment for a period of two years to simple imprisonment for a period of one year, and the sentence with respect to the other two offences, i.e. 279 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code, has been maintained. Hence, the present Revision Petition.

The matter was heard for some time. However, after sometime accused did not press the same. Though an attempt was made to show that the accident took place due to mechanical defect in the vehicle, but however in view of the concurrent findings of fact rendered by the Courts below and the fact that such findings are not being assailed. I need not go into this aspect.

Petitioner is present in the Court. He submits that though he does not assail the order of conviction, but however pleads that considering the long time gap between the occurrence of the incident and the other attending circumstances, a lenient view be taken while imposing penalty of sentence. He submits that he is 38 years of age, has three small children and old parents of 72 and 70 years of age, who are also living with him. He also submits that he is a small agriculturist, doing petty jobs and the sole bread earner of the family and that his earning is not sufficient enough for the family to make both ends meet. He also submits that it is his first offence and has never violated any law either prior to the occurrence of the incident in question or thereafter.

Record reveals that the offence took place in the year 2004. No purpose would now be served by sending the petitioner behind bars at this point in time. Considering the long passage of time and keeping in view the overall attending circumstances, as noticed hereinabove, I am of the considered view that a lenient view is ought to be taken in the matter and interest of justice would be served if the sentence of imprisonment so awarded by the lower Appellate Court, is reduced till the rising of Court. Ordered accordingly. However, sentence with regard to fine is enhanced from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 12,000 for offence, punishable u/s 304A of the Indian Penal Code; from Rs. 500 to Rs. 2.500 for offence punishable u/s 337 of the Indian Penal Code; and from Rs. 500 to Rs. 1,500 for offence punishable u/s 279 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner has already deposited the amount of fine, as ordered by the Court below. He undertakes to deposit the balance amount of fine before the trial Court within a period of six weeks from today. It is clarified that if the enhanced amount of fine is not so deposited within the aforesaid period, the petitioner-accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Hence, order of conviction and sentence as passed by the lower Appellate Court is modified accordingly.

With the aforesaid observations, present Revision Petition stands disposed of. Registry is directed to supply a copy of this judgment to the petitioner-accused free of cost.