High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/33/2017dismissed

Gurdev Singh v. State Of Punjab

2017-05-25Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj2 pages

CRR-33-2017 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Criminal Revision No.33 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 25, 2017 Gurdev Singh ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Punjab ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Sutikshan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

Mr. Jashanpreet Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.

This is revision petition filed by Gurdev Singh against the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa, whereby appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of the trial Court was dismissed and his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code (for short-IPC), was maintained. Vide order dated 27.03.2017, notice of motion was issued only on the question of quantum of sentence awarded to the petitioner. Learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of `2000/- for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a Sachin Mehta 2017.05.26 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH

CRR-33-2017 -2period of one month.

As per case of the prosecution, petitioner caused accident due to his rash and negligent driving of the canter bearing registration No.RJ32G-0310, which resulted in death of Nazar Singh at the spot and injuries to Joginder Singh and two ladies. Later on Joginder Singh also died in the hospital. At the time of accident, both the deceased and the injured were standing by the side of the road.

It was proved on record that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of canter by the petitioner which resulted in loss of two valuable lives and injuries to other two ladies. On perusal of the judgments of the Courts below, I find that the trial Court has already taken a very lenient view while awarding sentence to the petitioner and find no reason to take a different view, calling for any interference by this Court.

This revision petition has no merits. Dismissed. ( SURINDER GUPTA ) May 25, 2017 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Sachin Mehta 2017.05.26 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH