High CourtsSingle Bench

Nirmal Singh vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 22 August 1988 · Citation: (1989) 2 ACC 539 : (1990) ACJ 394

HON’BLE JUDGES
Amrit Lal Bahri, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 279, 304A, 337, 338
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 728 of 1988
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 400 words

A.L. Bahri, J.—Nirmal Singh was convicted by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Palwal, vide order dated November 28,1986 and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year u/s 304A, Indian Penal Code, and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500/- under the aforesaid section. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month each under Sections 279/337/338, Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Out of the fine of Rs. 1,500/-, Rs. 1,200/- were ordered to be paid to the heirs of the deceased. His appeal failed before the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad on July 15, 1988. He has come up in revision.

2.

At the time of motion hearing, notice regarding sentence only was ordered to issue. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that it is a fit case where benefit of Probation of Offenders Act should be allowed to the petitioner who is about 24 years of age and is not a previous convict.

3.

As per prosecution allegations, on April 21, 1984 at about 3 p.m., the petitioner was driving truck No. UTX 5565 on Delhi-Mathura Road. Some passengers were sitting on the truck whereas some were sitting in the body of the truck. The said truck was full of cylinders. Near village Kuslipur, one tractor was seen going ahead. The truck driver while trying to overtake the tractor, overturned the truck with the result the passengers sitting in the truck including Sat Pal, Tara Chand, Pappu, Maya and Bikram suffered injuries. Sukh Pal also suffered injuries. He, however, died. Thus, there was conviction u/s 304A, Indian Penal Code, of the petitioner.

4.

Keeping into consideration the peculiar facts of the case, as stated above, the age of the accused-petitioner and that he is not a previous convict, instead of sentencing him to jail, I order him to be released on probation on his entering into a bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- to keep peace and be of good behaviour for a period of two years and to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad. The amount of fine would be paid as costs of the proceedings and out of the amount of Rs. 1,500/-, a sum of Rs. 1,200/- will be paid to the heirs of the deceased