Criminal Revision No. 1785 of 2009 -1-
****
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Revision No. 1785 of 2009
Date of decision : 18.11.2009
Ravinder Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND
Present: Mr. Arun Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S.Pattar, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana
S. D. ANAND, J.
In this revision petition against conviction, notice only qua the
sentence was issued by a Coordinate Bench (Mahesh Grover, J.) of this
Court. The Bench further observed that the issuance of notice would
enable the parties to explore the possibility of compensating the family of
the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs that inspite of his
best endeavour it has not been possible to bring the petitioner around to
consider granting compensation to the family of the deceased. The matter
has, thus, to be disposed of on merits thereof.
The charge upheld against the petitioner was that he caused
death of Madan Lal by having driven vehicle bearing Registration No,HR
46A-7072 rashly and negligently. That finding of fact was affirmed in Ist
Appeal by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari.
The learned counsel for the petitioner, being cognizant of the
fact that it is only notice qua sentence which had been issued, states that
petitioner had already undergone sentence for a period of two months.
Criminal Revision No. 1785 of 2009 -2-
****
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that sentence awarded to the
petitioner may be reduced to the period already undergone.
Learned State counsel contests the plea and states that the
sentence does not deserve dilution as one life was lost in the impugned
accident.
The factors, which go into the determination of an order on
point of sentence, include the damage caused to the party affected
thereby. In the given case, the petitioner drove a truck at a rash speed
and in a negligent manner and that manner of driving caused the death of
Madan Lal, a rickshaw puller. Those who drive vehicles on the highway
must all the time remain cognizant of the fact that there are less privileged
brethren of theirs as well who tread the road as pedestrians or otherwise,
particularly when the vehicle is passing through a populated area. Madan
Lal was obviously plying the rickshaw for earning a living. In the
circumstances of the case, there is no justification whatsoever to consider
dilution of sentence awarded to the petitioner by the learned Trial
Magistrate and the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
Dismissed.
November 18, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE