Criminal Revision No. 1290 of 1999 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 1290 of 1999 Date of Decision: 8.8.2008 Dalbir Singh …Petitioner Versus Union Territory of Chandigarh …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr.Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present revision petition has been preferred by Dalbir Singh, who was convicted by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, under Sections 279 & 304-A IPC. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- under Section 279 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years and to pay a fine of Rs.300/- under Section 304-A IPC. In default of payment of fine, he was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. Aggrieved against the said judgment, the petitioner had Criminal Revision No. 1290 of 1999 2 preferred an appeal, which was also dismissed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 1.5.1992 the Station House Officer, Police Station Sector 31, Chandigarh, had received a message from Police Control Room that an accident had taken place near Hallomajra Chowk. On receiving the said information, he along with other police officials rushed to the spot where he came to know that injured Mohinder Singh had been taken to the P.G.I. Then he reached at PGI where Roshan Lal son of Karta Ram had got recorded his statement that he was doing the business of Dairy Farming near village Hallomajra, Chandigarh. He further stated that at about 11.00 P.M. or 12.00 Noon, his brother-in-law namely Mohinder Singh son of Kundan Singh and his father-in-law Ram Pal, were coming to see them. It was further stated that they were standing at the local bus stop to give farewell to them. It was further stated that at about 3.00 P.M. Mohinder Singh was moving ahead of them and for crossing the road Mohinder looked at the left and right sides of the road and when he tried to cross the road, one Ambassador Car bearing No. CHZ-233, which was being driven by the petitioner in a rash and negligent manner and came at a high speed and hit Mohinder Singh. The car dragged Mohinder Singh at some distance. They took Mohinder Singh to the hospital but on the way he had succumbed to his injuries. It was further stated that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid car by the petitioner namely Dalbir Singh. The FIR was investigated and the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted. Petitioner was charged for the offences under Criminal Revision No. 1290 of 1999 3 Sections 279 & 304-A IPC. The prosecution examined Roshan Lal as PW.1, is the complainant and eye witness to the occurrence, who had supported the prosecution case. PW.2 Heera Singh is the brother of deceased Mohinder Singh. He identified the dead body of Heera Singh. PW.3 Ram Pal is another eye witness to the occurrence and he corroborated the testimony of PW.1 Roshan Lal. PW.4 Om Parkash, Sub Inspector, is the Investigating Officer of the case. He had also recorded the statement of complainant PW.1 Roshan Lal and proved his endorsement Ex.PA and FIR Ex.PA/2. He had also taken into possession the Ambassador Car bearing No. CHZ- 233 vide recovery memo Ex.PC. He had also taken in to possession the driving license, identity card and registration certificate of the car from the petitioner vide recovery memo Ex.PD. He had also proved the site plan Ex.PF. PW.5 Sunder Singh is the Clerk in the office of State Transport Authority, Chandigarh, who proved that the offending Car was registered in the name of Hari Chand son of Naik Ram. PW.6 Puran Chand is working as Fitter in the C.T.U. Workshop. He had mechanically examined the offending Car and had given his report Ex.PJ. PW.7 Dr. R.M.Singh, on 2.5.1992, had conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Mohinder Singh and had also proved his report Ex.PW6/A and diagram Ex.PW6/B. PW.8 Mohinder Pal is Clerk in the office of Sub Divisional Criminal Revision No. 1290 of 1999 4 Magistrate, Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, had given his report Ex.PH/1 regarding verification of the driving license of the petitioner. Thereafter, the prosecution had closed its evidence. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution. At time of sentencing, the petitioner had stated that he is a poor man and has a big family to serve and in case he would be sentenced his entire family would suffer starvation. The two Courts below have believed the testimony of PW.1 Roshan Lal, complainant and PW.3 Ram Pal that the petitioner was driving the offending car rashly and negligently, due to which Mohinder Singh had died. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he will not be able to assail the prosecution case as the two Courts below have held the petitioner to be guilty. He further stated that he will confine his arguments only regarding reduction of sentence of the petitioner. He further stated that in the present case the occurrence had taken place on 1.5.1992 and the petitioner has suffered the protracted trial for the last 16 years. He further stated that in the last 16 years except the present offence, the petitioner has not committed any other offence and is leading the life of honest and peaceful citizen. Therefore, sending the petitioner behind the bars at this stage will serve no useful purpose. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to monetarily compensate the family of the deceased. According to counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has Criminal Revision No. 1290 of 1999 5 undergone only six days, out of his actual sentence. Taking into consideration protracted trial, the conduct and antecedents of the petitioner and the fact that family of the deceased can be monetarily compensated by the petitioner, it is ordered that the sentence awarded to the petitioner is reduced to already undergone subject to payment of Rs.35,000/- as cost, which shall be disbursed to the legal heirs of the deceased Mohinder Singh. Accordingly, on deposit of Rs.35,000/- as fine, the sentence of the petitioner shall be reduced to already undergone. In case the fine is not deposited, no benefit of reduction of sentence shall accrue to the petitioner. With these modifications in the sentence, the present revision petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge August 8, 2008 “DK”