SHER SINGH Vs. STATE OF U T (CHANDIGARH)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Sher Singh is employed by the Punjab Roadways, Chandigarh as a driver. While he was driving Bus No PUG 1783 on February 4, 1982, he was involved in an accident at about 5.00 P.M. In that accident Des Raj and Dinesh Kumar were injured. Subsequently Des Raj succumbed to the injuries and died in the hospital. The petitioner was convicted under Sections 279, 337 and 304 -A, Indian Penal Code, by the trial Magistrate on April 8, 1983. He was sentenced to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment under section 279, a similar sentence was imposed upon him under section 337 and he was sentenced to nine months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - under section 304 -A, Indian Penal Code. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. He had filed an appeal against the judgment of the trial Magistrate which was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide the impugned judgment dated November 21, 1993. Against the judgment in appeal the petitioner has filed the instant revision.

(2.) FROM unimpeachable testimony of Dinesh Kumar who was also injured in the accident it stands proved that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the petitioner. The order of conviction recorded against the petitioner by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, is therefore, unassailable. The conviction of the petitioner is consequently affirmed.

(3.) THE petitioner's counsel prayed that it is a fit case in which the petitioner may be released on probation. In this context it may be noticed that the petitioner had immediately stopped the bug when the accident took place and carried the injured persons in the bus to the hospital. It is, therefore, evident that the petitioner was not indifferent to what had taken place and he contributed his services in removing the injured to the hospital immediately. The petitioner is admittedly a first offender and if his sentence is maintained, he is likely to lose his service which will result in financial stringency of his family. Thus, taking into consideration the post accident behaviour of the petitioner and his antecedents his sentence is suspended and he is ordered to be released on probation on executing the requisite bond for a period of one year in the sum of Rs. 5000/ - with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court binding himself to come and receive sentence when call upon to do so and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. He is further directed to pay Rs. 5000/ - as compensation to the next of kin of the deceased Des Raj under section 5 of the Probation of Offenders Act.