IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.2429 of 2003 Date of decision: 15th February, 2010 Ramesh Pal … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Sarbjeet Khaira, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Ramesh Pal son of Melo Ram was named as accused in case FIR No.41 dated 04.04.1996 registered at Police Station Sadar Gurdaspur under Sections 304-A, 279, 337, 338 and 427 IPC. In the present case, an accident had occurred in the area of Bal Sukh Sagar Bhawan, G.T. Road, Gurdaspur on 4th April, 1996 at 7.00 a.m. Petitioner was driver of the bus bearing registration No.PB06-1143 and due to rash and negligent driving, petitioner had caused hurt to Inderjit Singh, Atma Singh and further had caused death of Manjit Kaur and Sukhjinder Singh. The Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Gurdaspur on 10th August, 1996 charged the petitioner for offence under Section 279, 304-A, 337 and 338 IPC. Prosecution story in brief was that one Sohan Singh son of Bawa Singh appeared before ASI Jagir Singh, who along with his companion police officials was present at bridge drain, G.T. Road in Criminal Revision No.2429 of 2003 connection with patrolling and made statement, on the basis of which, formal FIR was registered. Sohan Singh stated that his brother Sukhjinder Singh and his wife Manjit Kaur were going to Oberoi Hospital, Gurdaspur to see the newly born grandson. Sukhjinder Singh and his wife Manjit Kaur were going on Enfield motorcycle. The complainant along with Swaran Singh were going on a scooter. Sukhjinder Singh was driving motorcycle bearing registration No.PSC-4777 at a normal speed and in the area of Bal Sukh Sagar Bhawan, petitioner was driving a bus at a very high speed without blowing any horn and had collided with the motorcycle of Sukhjinder Singh. Trial Court found the petitioner guilty of offence under Section 304-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten months and to pay fine of Rs.250/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Petitioner was also sentenced under Section 338 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and further under Section 337 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed. Counsel for the petitioner has very fairly stated that in the present occurrence, two persons namely Inderjit Singh and Atma Singh were injured. Atma Singh appeared as PW-6 and his testimony was duly corroborated by Sohan Singh complainant PW-5 and Swaran Singh PW-4. Therefore, he will not be in a position to assail the conviction of the petitioner. Counsel has further stated that occurrence in the present case had taken place in April, 1996. Petitioner has already suffered mental pain and agony of protracted trial for about 14 years. Therefore, reduction in sentence may be considered by this Court. I have perused the evidence. Two courts below have rightly placed reliance upon the testimony of witnesses to arrive at a conclusion 2 Criminal Revision No.2429 of 2003 that petitioner is guilty of offence under Section 304-A, 338 and 337 IPC. However, taking into consideration that petitioner is in the corridors of Court for last 14 years, sentence of ten months rigorous imprisonment awarded under Section 304-A IPC by the trial Court to the petitioner and affirmed by the lower appellate Court is reduced to eight months rigorous imprisonment. However, sentence awarded on different counts shall run concurrently. Sentence of fine and default clause are maintained. With the modifications in sentence noticed above, present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 15, 2010 rps 3