Santosh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

The applicant was earlier convicted by the JMFC, Hatod, District Indore vide its judgement dated 29.09.2016 passed in Criminal Case No.68/2015, whereby he has been convicted under Section 304-A of IPC and sentenced for 1 year & 6 months RI with fine of Rs.500/- and in default, to suffer 15 days RI. This judgement was appealed against and the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Indore vide its judgement dated 19.06.2019 passed in Cr. A. No.918/2016 affirmed the judgement of conviction and no change was made in the sentence imposed which also thus stood affirmed.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that instead of making submissions on the application for suspension of jail sentence, he would make final submissions.

Final submissions were made by both the counsels for the parties.

Learned counsel for the applicant does not seek to challenge the judgements of the Courts below pertaining to finding of conviction but would make submissions only to the quantum of sentence.

As per the prosecution story, on 21.03.2015 at around 6.45 AM, applicant drove his Tata 407 vehicle bearing registration No.MP09 KD 5188 rashly and negligently and collided against a vehicle driven by the deceased Ramprasad, as a consequence of this collision, motorcycle driven by deceased Ramprasad came beneath the truck driven by the applicant. The deceased suffered fatal injuries and succumbed to his injuries. The report was lodged and the applicant was charge-sheeted under Section 304-A of IPC.

Learned Trial Court found the charge proved under Section 304-A of IPC and convicted and sentenced the applicant as aforementioned, which has been affirmed by the Appellate Court and the conviction arrived at by the Courts below are after proper appreciation of evidence placed on record and therefore, the conclusion regarding conviction is affirmed.

Adverting to the quantum of sentence, the applicant has been sentenced for 1 ½ years RI. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the jail sentence is not mandatory under Section 304-A of IPC and prays that the period already undergone be considered appropriate sentence in this matter.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State was also heard.

Considered rival contentions.

On due consideration of the fact that there are no antecedents of such traffic accident registered against the applicant on previous occasions and applicant being the first offender, it would be appropriate to reduce the quantum of jail sentence albeit not to the extent as prayed by the counsel for the applicant. However, in my considered opinion, the jail sentence of 6 months RI with consequential enhancement of fine amount from Rs.500/- to Rs.5,000/- (in all inclusive of Rs.500/- already imposed) would be appropriate sentence and would meet ends of justice. On failure to pay the fine amount by the applicant, he shall be required to undergo imprisonment of 4 months RI for the default. Out of total fine amount of Rs.5,000/-, Rs.4,000/- shall be paid to the legal representative of the deceased.

With the aforesaid modifications in the quantum of sentence, this revision application stands partly allowed and disposed of, in above terms. The order pertaining to property passed by the Courts below stands affirmed.

A copy of this order along with original record be sent to the Trial Court for due compliance.

Certified copy, as per rules.