Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 05.01.2011 Joginder Pal .......... petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present : Mr. Ashok Kumar Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. **** RITU BAHRI, J. (ORAL) CRM No. 67302 of 2010 Application is allowed. Annexures P-1 to P-3 are taken on record. Applicant is exempted from filing the certified and duly typed copies thereof. Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 This criminal revision has been filed against the impugned judgments passed by the learned Courts below convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the offence under Section 304-A IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. On 25.10.2004, after receiving medical ruqa from the Civil Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 -2- Hospital, ASI Darshan Singh along with other police officials reached the Civil Hospital and obtained the opinion of the doctor regarding fitness of the injured to make the statement and thereafter recorded the statement of Gurjant Singh, who stated that he was resident of Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar Handiaya Road back side Hind Motors Barnala and was running the business of hardware computer. They were two brothers and one sister. He was eldest one. His father Nachattar Singh was pensioner and was posted as security guard at the factory. On that day i.e. on 25.10.2004 his father Nachattar Singh had gone to village Kotduna at about 2 O'Clock, which was the Nanka village. At about 6.30 P.M. of the same day he was going to Punjab Poultry Farm for purchasing eggs on his bicycle and when he reached near the gate of the factory, he saw one bus bearing No. PB-03-H-1975 belonging to New Deep Bus Service coming at a high speed without blowing any horn and collided with one scooter Bajaj. Person of the scooter fell on the road and by going nearby he identified that person as his father who was having his scooter bearing No. PB-19-A-2963. He received multiple injuries on his person and thereafter he was taken to civil hospital on ambulance. He stated that bus was being driven by Joginder Singh rashly and negligently. He further stated that his father Nachhattar Singh succumbed to injuries in the hospital. This statement was read over and explained to Gurjant Singh who after admitting it correct signed the same and after making the endorsement it was sent to the police station. On the basis of this statement FIR Ex. PD/2 was recorded by ASI Darshan Singh. Post mortem examination of the deceased was Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 -3- got conducted. Rough site plan of the place of accident was prepared. Vehicles were taken into possession and their mechanical test reports were obtained. Accused was arrested, R.C., Insurance and Photostat copy of the permit were taken into possession of the police. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completion of investigation, challan was presented in the learned lower Court for trial. Accused was charged for the offence under Section 304- A IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To prove its case the prosecution examined Dr. Suresh Kumar as PW1. He deposed that cause of death in his opinion was due to shock and hemorrhage due to injury No.1 which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature and all the injuries were ante mortem in nature. C. Satpal PW2 who tested the scooter bearing No. PB- 19-A-2963 and bus bearing No. PB-03-H-1975 proved his reports Ex.PB and Ex. PC respectively. He deposed that that these reports bore his signatures and he had experience of 18 years at his credit. ASI Darshan Singh appeared as PW3. His examination- in-chief was partly recorded but later on he did not join the proceedings. Jeet Singh PW3/A proved the photographs of the place of occurrence Ex.P-3 to Ex.P-9 and negatives Ex. P10 to Ex.P18. Gurjant Singh PW1, is the complainant of the case who identified the accused present in the court being same person who was driving the bus rashly and negligently. Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 -4- Darshan Singh PW-5 was Manager of Jai Gurudev Transport Company Fazilka since 5.11.2003. Accused Joginder Pal was employed by their company as driver of Bus No. PB-03-H-1975 and he was driver of the bus on that day which started from Nawanshahar to Bathinda at 1.30 P.M. and from Barnala to Bathinda at 6.30 P.M. He deposed that on the day when accident took place the accused was driving the said vehicle. Makhan Lal (PW-6) brought the record of ownership of scooter No. PB-19-A-2963 in the name of Nachatter Singh and proved the original RC Ex. PW6/A. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. He denied the allegations and pleaded innocence. The learned trial Court after going through the evidence convicted the petitioner / accused Joginder Pal of the offence under Section 304-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Out of the said amount of fine, 50% was to be paid to the family members of the deceased Nachhattar Singh. The learned lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the material on record is insufficient to hold the petitioner guilty under Section 304-A IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he should be released on probation. The petitioner is 60 years of age and is suffering from heart problem. He has faced trial since the year Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 -5- 2004. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the medical record of the petitioner (Annexure P-1 to P-3). In July 2010 he has attained the age of 65 years. The petitioner has been in custody for over three months. Mr. Vishal Munjal, Addl. A.G., Punjab has placed on record the custody certificate by way of affidavit of Shivraj Singh Nandgarh, Deputy Superintendent Sub Jail, Barnala. As per this certificate he has undergone almost three months as on 5.1.2011. There is no contradiction in the deposition of the witnesses. Learned Courts below have held that the bus was being driven very rashly and negligently by the petitioner / accused and the judgments of the learned lower Courts are liable to be upheld as they are based on the evidence on record and oral testimony of the witnesses. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment and orders. I find no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and orders. The accused caused an accident leading to the demise of Nachhattar Singh, who was driving in a scooter. All the witnesses have categorically deposed that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving by the driver. The Manager of the company, where the driver was working, had stated that on that day the petitioner / accused was driving the bus. Consequently, the judgments and orders passed by the learned Courts below do not call for any interference by this Court. However, I am of the view that in view of the emerging circumstances the petitioner should be released on probation. The Crl. Rev. No. 2934 of 2010 -6- petitioner has undergone almost three months of actual sentence and has faced the trial for about five years. He is 65 years of age. He is a first offender. The above circumstances are sufficient to extend the benefit of probation to the petitioner. Consequently, this revisoin petition is partly allowed to the extent that the petitioner's conviction under Section 304-A IPC is upheld and the sentence awarded to him is modified to the extent that instead of undergoing the remaining part of sentence the petitioner is directed to be released on probation on executing bonds to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala. The petitioner is however, directed to file an undertaking to keep peace and maintain good behaviour for one year and to appear and undergo sentence as and when called upon to do so. 05.01.2011 (RITU BAHRI) 'sp' JUDGE