RAJIV CHOPRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned judgment dated 14.09.2011 and order on sentence dated 17.09.2011 whereby he has been sentenced to undergo SI for six months with fine of Rs. 1,000/- for offence punishable under Section 279 Indian Penal Code, 1860. Further sentenced to undergo SI for one year with fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 304A Indian Penal Code, 1860. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Being aggrieved, the applicant/convict assailed the aforesaid judgment and order on sentence before the Sessions Court; whereupon vide order dated 20.01.2012, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi allowed partially and maintained the conviction; however reduced the sentence from one year to nine months only under Section 304A Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) Ms. Rebecca M. John, learned counsel for petitioner, on instructions, submits that petitioner is not challenging the impugned judgment dated 14.09.2011 whereby he was held guilty and convicted. However, she has prayed for modification of order on sentence dated 17.09.2011 passed by learned-Trial Court and subsequently modified by learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide order dated 20.01.2012 to the extent of period already undergone.

(3.) She further submits that in the instant case, one precious life has been lost. It was a sad accident. The deceased belonged to a poor family. She does not dispute this fact. Therefore, petitioner wants to compensate the parents of deceased for a sum of Rs. 8.00 Lacs; so that the parents may live comfortably at their fag end.