Crl.Revn. NO.1481 of 2003 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Revn. NO.1481 of 2003 DATE OF DECISION: 22.02.2010 Bablu Kumar ...PETITIONER VS. State of Punjab ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL PRESENT: Ms.Shweta Bawa, Advocate as amicus curiae for the petitioner. Mr.Vishal Munjal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. MOHINDER PAL, J.(Oral) Petitioner Bablu Kumar was convicted by the trial Court under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). He was sentenced to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default of payment of fine, rigorous imprisonment for one month under Section 279 of the Code. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, rigorous imprisonment for one month under Section 337 of Crl.Revn. NO.1481 of 2003 2 the Code. He was further awarded rigorous imprisonment for 1-1/2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month under Section 304-A of the Code. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. His appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. Hence this revision petition. In this case, petitioner Bablu Kumar, who was driving the ill-fated Tata Sumo at a very high speed and in a negligent manner, got struck the Tata Sumo with the tree of Toot and again against the tree known as Beri and, thereafter, threw away the Tata Sumo in the canal bridge. Due to the above said accident, the wife of the complainant, who was sitting on the seat at the back side of the driver and Sandhu Naresh Kumar, who was sitting besides Renuka Chawla, received the head injuries. Both of them died at the place of accident. The complainant Krishan Kumar Chawla, who was sitting with his son Roban Chawla on the front seat, three children of sister-in-law of the complainant, who were also sitting in the vehicle also received injuries. Further, father-in-law and mother-in-law of Krishan Kumar Chawal, who were also occupying the vehicle received the injuries in this accident. The accident was witnessed by Roban Chawla son of Krishan Chawla and other members i.e. father-in-law and mother-in-law of Krishan Chawla. The instant case was registered on the basis of statement Ex.PA made by Krishan Kumar Chawla-complainant. I have heard Ms.Shweta Bawa, Advocate as amicus curiae for the petitioner and Mr.Vishal Munjal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State and have gone through the record of the case. Crl.Revn. NO.1481 of 2003 3 The prosecution has proved the entire allegations against the accused without any suspicion. In this case, both P.W.2 Krishan Chawla and P.W.3 Parerna Chawla, who were travelling in the same Tata Sumo categorically deposed that they had been requesting the accused Bablu Kumar to drive at a slow speed, but he kept on ignoring their request and increasing the speed of Tata Sumo. There was no reason for the prosecution witnesses to falsely implicate the petitioner. In fact, no serious challenge could be made to the veracity of the prosecution case by the counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments. In view of the above, the petitioner has rightly been convicted under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Code. The sentence awarded to the petitioner also commensurates with the offence committed by him. Under the circumstances, I do not see any reason warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, this revision petition is hereby dismissed being without any merit. February 22, 2010 ( MOHINDER PAL ) jt JUDGE