STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. BENOY THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State being aggrieved by the Judgment in CC No. 199/1995 dt. 6-2-1996 on the file of the J. M. F. C. (III) Court, Mangalore, has preferred this Criminal-appeal for enhancement of sentence.

(2.) This is the case where the trial Court has convicted the accused under S.304-A, IPC and has sentenced the accused till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to undergo S.I. for six months. The State has challenged the sentence relying on a judgment of Supreme Court reported in ILR 1987 Kant 1894 : (1987 Cri LJ 776), State of Karnataka v. Krishna @ Raju. The Supreme Court in that judgment has found fault in Court's rendering flea bite sentence. The Supreme Court found that the conduct of the accused in that case was reprehensible where the accused failed to secure the medical assistance to the injured person and also failed to report the accident to the police authorities. In the words of the Supreme Court here was a case where the respondent had not only driven his bus in a reckless manner and caused the death of one person and injuries to another but he had also attempted to escape prosecution by failing to report the accident to the police authorities. The Supreme Court in 1968 Ace CJ 38 in Bhalachandra Waman Pathe v. State of Maharashtra, has held that the question as to what sentence should be imposed was essentially within the discretion of the trial Court and the High Court was not justified in interfering with the discretion unless it was satisfied that the sentence imposed by the trial Court was unduly lenient or in other words grossly inadequate.

(3.) In 1983 SCC (Cri) 160 : (1983 Cri LJ 1271), in Thippaswamy v. State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court has held as follows :-