IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.101 of 2001 Date of Decision : August 17, 2010 Maha Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Ravi Kiran Dahiya, Advocate Ms. Shalini Attri, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. T.P.S. MANN, J. This revision had been filed by the petitioner under Section 401 Cr.P.C. against his conviction and sentence for offences under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC as ordered by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sonepat on 12/13.8.1999 and upheld by Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat on 5.1.2001 by dismissing his appeal. According to the prosecution, on 18.3.1992 complainant- Sultan Singh alongwith his brother's wife Raj Bala and his niece Jyoti, daughter of Jai Dev, aged about 3½ years, was returning to his house from Gitwar situated on the out skirts of the village. When they were present on the kacha berm of the road, a mini bus bearing registration No.HR-10-2900 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came from the side of Auchandi border and while coming to the wrong side of the Criminal Revision No.101 of 2001 -2- road, struck Miss Jyoti. On account of the impact, Jyoti sustained injuries on her head as well as hands. After the occurrence, the driver stopped the bus at some distance and revealed his identity as Maha Singh. Thereafter, he managed to escape alongwith the bus towards Kharkhoda. The injured was immediately taken to P.G.I., Rohtak by her father Jai Dev, where she succumbed to her injuries. Initially, FIR No.89 dated 18.3.1992 was registered at Police Station Kharkhoda for offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC on the statement of complainant-Sultan Singh. However, after the death of Jyoti, offence under Section 304-A IPC was added to the heading of the FIR. After completion of the investigation and presentation of the challan by the police, the petitioner was tried for offences under Sections 279/304-A IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined complainant-Sultan Singh as PW1, Smt. Raj Bala, an eye- witness and mother of the deceased as PW2, Jai Dev, father of the deceased as PW3, Ram Parkash, Motor-Mechanic as PW4, HC Balwan Singh as PW5, Zile Singh, Duty Inspector of Haryana Roadways as PW6, HC Krishan Chander as PW7 and Dr. Narender Singh as PW8. Criminal Revision No.101 of 2001 -3- When the petitioner was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied all the allegations levelled against him and pleaded that he was innocent. However, he did not examine any defence evidence. The trial Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and examining the evidence available on the record, believed the prosecution case and convicted the petitioner for the offences under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months on the first count and rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- on the second. In default of payment of fine, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 days. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The conviction and sentences of the petitioner were upheld by the lower appellate Court by dismissing the appeal filed by him. I had heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The plea of the petitioner was that it was Jyoti, who was responsible for the accident as she suddenly started Criminal Revision No.101 of 2001 -4- crossing the road without caring for the traffic on the road and her mother and uncle did not take proper care of her. Instead, they allowed her to move ahead of them by two feet. Therefore, the conviction of the petitioner cannot be sustained. In support of the plea, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon decision in Vijender Singh v. State of Haryana, 1994 (2) RCR (Criminal) 20. Though PW1 Sultan Singh had deposed that Jyoti was moving ahead at a distance of two feet and her hand had not been held by her mother yet it cannot be said that the petitioner was not responsible for causing the accident. It is in evidence that it was the petitioner who brought the bus to the kacha berm where deceased Jyoti was moving with her mother and uncle. In doing so, the petitioner was rash and negligent as the bus driven by him struck against Jyoti who sustained injuries. In the case of Vijender Singh (supra) there was evidence that the deceased boy had suddenly started crossing the road when the offending truck was at a distance of 6/7 feet. Under these circumstances, it was held that the petitioner therein was not rash and negligent in driving. On the other hand, in the present case, the deceased was moving on the kacha berm and had not attempted to cross the road. Therefore, it was the petitioner who, by his rash and negligent driving caused the accident. Criminal Revision No.101 of 2001 -5- Learned counsel for the petitioner had also submitted that the petitioner was not a previous convict and in case he was sentenced, he would lose his job. Therefore, he be granted the benefit of probation. The petitioner has been found to be rash and negligent in driving a public transport bus which resulted in the accident taking place and a small child of 3½ years losing her life. Therefore, the petitioner has disentitled him from being granted the benefit of probation. However, keeping in view the fact that the accident had taken place more than eighteen years ago and the petitioner has already undergone sentence of about one month out of the sentence for six months, I consider it just and proper to reduce the substantive sentence of the petitioner to that already undergone by him. Resultantly, the conviction of the petitioner for offences under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC is maintained. His substantive sentences of imprisonment are reduced to that already undergone by him. Sentence of fine, alongwith its default, clause is maintained. The revision is, accordingly, disposed of. (T.P.S.MANN) August 17, 2010 JUDGE satish