ASHOK DHANUMAL ALIMCHANDANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the accused who has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Presidency Magistrate, 9th Court Bandra, Bombay, of offences under section 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code and section 89(a) r/w. section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act. After the appeal was almost fully argued by Mr. Jethmalani on behalf of the accused, Mr. Jethmalani applied that the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed upon his client should be quashed and that his client should be sentenced to a fine instead in respect of each of the offences of which he has been found guilty. Mr. Jethmalani stated that his client has already deposited in the Court today a sum of Rs .100,00/- in cash for the purpose of its being paid over as compensation to the legal heirs and/or representatives of the deceased Kashinath Babulal Bhatkar who would have been entitled to recover damages for the death of deceased under Fatal Accidents Act, 1855. Mr. Jethmalani submitted that he would withdrawn his appeal on merits.

(2.) In the course of the arguments of Mr. Jethmalani on behalf of the accused, evidence was pointed out to me to show that the deceased was drunk to a considerable extent, and that, in my opinion, is a factor which, whilst not such as to affect the criminal liability of the accused for the rash and negligent act in question, can certainly be taken into account in the matter of sentence as far as the offence under section 354-A of the Indian Penal Code in concerned. As far as the offence under section 89(a) read with section 118 of the Motor Vehicles Act is concerned, it is true that the evidence shows that the accused drove away and did not stop to render medical assistance available to the deceased when he was knocked down, but the evidence in the case also shows that the deceased was a worker of the Indian United Mills No. VI which had just discharged a large number of workers from one of its shifts and the accused might, therefore, well have apprehended that he would be set upon and manhandled by the large number of workers who came out of the Mill premises of whom the deceased appears to have been the one. This again is a factor which, whilst not affecting the criminal liability of the accused for the said offence under the Motor Vehicles Act, is one which I can take into account in the matter of sentence in regard to that offence. Having considered that matter carefully, I therefore, reduce the sentence passed upon the accused for the offence under section 304-A I.P.C. to one of imprisonment till the rising of the Court. As far as the offence under the Motor Vehicles act is concerned, I reduce the sentence passed upon him for the same also to one of imprisonment till the rising of the Court. These two sentence have to run concurrently.

(3.) In the result, this appeal will stand dismissed, except to the extent stated above. I direct that the sum of Rs. 10,000/- deposited in the Court by the accused today should be paid over to the heirs and/or legal representatives of the deceased who may be entitled to the same under the personal law governing the deceased in the proportions in which they are entitled to inherit under that law. The office will make the necessary inquiries in that behalf as the accused has himself applied, if there are no heirs or if none can be discovered within a period of one year from today, the said amount should be paid over to the chief Ministers Fund.