54 0 P CriminalRevision N1381 of 2009 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CriminalRevision N1381 of2009 Decided on 102009 Jarnail Singh Petitioner r 0 Versus C I Stateof Punjab Respondent C5 I z CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE KC PURI 2 Present Mr VipinMahajanAdvocate for the petitioner M Sudhir Nehra Addl A G Punjab I 08 K C PURI J mwo Z This is a revision petitionagainstthe judgmentdated 2542002 passedby Shri Surinder Mohan Iearrd Additional Sessions JudgeGurdaspur vide which the appealpreferredbythe accusedevisionist againstthejudgment dated 172002 passedby Shri BhajanRam Sub Divisional Judicial MagistratePathankot holdinghim guiltyunder Section 304A of the Indian PenaI Code short the IPCIand to undergorigorous for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rsl 0001 In default of paymentof fine to undergofurther rigorousimprisonment for a periodof one month 1 The brief of the prosecutioncase are that on Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 55 151 Cminal Revision No1381 of2009 2 t P 4 37 27 1999 at about 35 m in the area of GRoad near Baba Shah Mazar Pathankot Dharamveer Singhmade a sttement ExAll to ASl JoginderSingh allegingthereinthat he is employed at the RanajitSagarDam Power Plant and while comingtowards his house after obtaining half dayIeave As usual he alongwith Ashok 1 Malhotrawent to the Shah Peer Mazar situated at Bharoli Khurd GT 0 C0 road Pathankot for prayingthe obeisance His father also them After payingthe obeisance at the Shah Peer C5 T I Mazar his father was goingahead on his Bicycleand theyfollowed z him At about 30 m A tata Trucke407bearing E 382550 came with rash and negligent manner without blowingany r horn at a publichighwaystruck againstthe Bicycle resultingthat I 08 JaganNath fell down in the middleof the road and sustained injuries on his head as well as rightarm and he died at the spot The cycle e7 was also badlydamaged The truck bearingNo382550 was Z beingdriven byJarnail Singh The driver of the truck ran awayfrom the spot Statement ExOAll Dharamveer Singh has been recorded byASI JoginderSinghwhich was read over to him and in token of its correctness he signedthe same and sent the same to the policestation RuqaExPAl2 was sent the to the policestation on the basis of which a formal FlR ExJ3 was recorded by Sl JoginderSinghhe postmortem examination of the deceased was got conducted Statements of the prosecutionwitnesses were recorded and accused was arrested After completionof necessary challan againstthe accused was presentedin the Court for trial Pe Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 56 Cminal Revision No381 of2009 3 4 P On appearance of the accused in the Court copiesof the documentswere suppliedto the accused under rules Findinga primafacie case the accused was charged under Section 30A IPC to which he pleadednot guiltyand claimed trial 1 The prosecutionin order to substantiate the charge 0 C examined Dharamveer PW l Ashok Malhotra Pawan Kumar PW31 DrllancyVerma PW4I ASl JoginderSingh Ne51 C5 and the evidence of was closed by the trial Coutt by Court order The accused was examined underSection 313 C C all the evidence were putto him which he denied and a5 pleadedhis innocence He however did not optto Iead evidence Ill defence 7 Z After perusalof the evidence the trial Court convictedthe Qm accused under Section 304A IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorousimprisonmentas narratedabove Feelingdisesatisfiedwith the above said judgmentthe petitionerhas preferredthe appealbefore the First AppellateCourt and the Iearned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgmentdated 11 2009 dismissed the appealof the appellant StiIIdissatisfied with both the judgments dated 1792002 and 11 52009 the presentrevisionpetition has been filed have heard Iearned counsel for the petitionerand IearnedState counsel and have gone throughthe records of the case with their assistance Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 57 CriminalRevision N1381 of 2009 4 t P 1 Learned counsel for the petitionerhas submitted that 1 has not been able to provethat accident has taken place due to rash and drivingof the petitionerAccordingto the own version did not stop at the spot The alleged could not see the petitionethe name of the petitionerdoes not figurein the FIR No test identificationparadewas 0 held The petitionerraised these argumentsbefore the First 3 Court but the said Court without meetingwith the said I C5 had dismissed the appeal It is further submittedthat in case the Court is not inclined to acceptthe prayer of the for acquittaiin that case he be m C allowed the concession of probationIn the alternative it is submitted that petitionerhas undergoneincarceration for a periodof five a5 monthso the sentence may be reduced in view of the following authorities 7 Z 1 1RaiinderKumar vs State of Harvana2008 21RCR Criminall 441 21Mazid VS State of Harvana2008 21 RCR Criminall 4 31 Gurdial Sinqh vs State of Punlab 2008 21 RCR Criminall 876 41 Malkiat Sinqh vs State of Puniab 2008 31 RCR Criminall 474 51Jaqdish VS State of Harvana2007 Il RCR Criminall 1Z 61 Hardev Sinqh VS State of Puniab 2007 41 RCR 1 Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 58 Criminal Revision No1381 of2009 5 P Criminall 232 71 Rohtash Kumar VS State of Harvana2009 l I RCR 4Criminall383 81 Sudh Ram vs State of Puniab 2006 31 RCR 4Criminall550 1 r 91 Bir Chand vs State of Harvana2003 31RCR 0 0 Criminall 451 and an case of this Court in I 1OIAshokKumar vs State of Puniab Criminal Revision C5 N02309 of 2007 decided on 1522008 The main stress of counsel for the petitioner is regarding Z 2 identityof the accused However both the Couns below have r this aspectof the case and came to the conclusion that it I 08 was the accused WhOwas drivingthe vehicle rashlyand and caused the death of the deceasecl That being a concurrent 7 findingdoes not cail for any interference In this case the Z has examined two eye witnesses PW4 Dharamvirand PV2 Ashok Kumar Both of them have been cross examined and nothingcould be broughton the file to discard their sworn testimony The complainantor the prosecutionwitnesses have not axed to grindagainstthe petitionerThere was no reason for falsely him and to allow the actual culpritto go scot l freeo the above said argument IS withoutany substance So far as the prayer for grantof relief of probationIS concerned the Honble ApexCourt in case Dalbir Sinqh vs State of Harvana2000 Criminal Law Journal ISCI 2283 has held that e6 normally the concessiOll of probationof offenders Act should not be 4 i eZ Itl 2 8 V Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 59 CriminalRevision No1381 of 2009 6 4e 0 granted to the accused under Section 304A IPC The petitioner IS l therefore not entitled to concession of probation Maximum under Section 304A IPC is two years The Courts have to struck balance in respectof rightsof both the partieslo doubt plightof the accused is a consideration before the Court 1 Ill facingthe trial but at the same time the Court cannot Iost sightof 0 the fact that plightof the familyof deceased A familywho Iost a C I familymember the state of mind of that can be wellimaginedThe C roads have viltuallybecome a death tral Nobodyknows nolroad I L user can saywith certainty that he will be In the house in the evening Z afterwork due to dangerous trend of road accident The cannot have any benefit of these authorities Ill the cases of Jaqdish Hardev Sinqh and Ashok a5 Kumar upralregardingrelease of the petitioner on probation aa So Ill these circumstances prayer for grantof probation Z stands declined r So far as authorities in the cases of RaiinderKumar Mazid Gurdial Sinqh Malkiat Sinqh Rohtash Kumar and Sudh Ram supral are concerned in these authoritiesthe sentence has been reduced where the victim familyhas been duly by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal or the sentence has been reduced afterenhancingthe the sentence of fine 1n the presentcase the appealwas decided bythe First Appellate Coutt on 11 2009 So the accused IS in custodyfor the Iast more than five months againstthe substantive sentence of nine months So keepingIn view the above said authorities the Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 60 72 0 CriminalRevision No1381 of 2009 7 a4 r 5i4 ro R t 1E reducedto the alreadyundergone However the rz sentence is e7 1L t sentenceof fine is enhanced to Rs250001e On realization the said amount of Rs50001 shall be paidto the Iegal of deceased under Section 357 Cl The revision petition stands disposedof m A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict 0 compliance C C5 2009 C PURII I Sv JUDGE 1 Z I a5 Ir Z rl C4a0 J Oii 19 r 1 41 1 Io 1 t9 1 e 148 02 5 1 P1 4 1 Z 18 57 sp 6 1 Rani Anita 2013.03.19 16: 08 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document