The main legal point established is the consideration of reformation and the principle of proportionality in sentencing.

Judgment

Mr. Harpreet Singh Brar, J.

The present revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dated 17.02.2021 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Panipat upholding the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.05.2017 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat, whereby the petitioner/accused has been convicted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A of IPC and has been awarded sentence as under:-

Section 279 IPC- Simple imprisonment of three months; and under Section 304-A IPC rigorous imprisonment for 1 ½ year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- with default mechanism.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this revision petition are that on 23.10.2013, a VT was received from Control Room, Panipat regarding an accident having taken place between a Trolla and motor-cycle near Kashigiri temple, Panipat. On receipt of this information, ASI Sultan Singh alongwith other police officials reached at the spot where complainant Sharif met him and got recorded his statement to the effect that he was running a barber shop at Bapoli and in front of his shop, there was an electronics shop of Anil Kumar. On that day, at about 8.00 pm, he alongwith Anil Kumar proceeded towards Panipat from Bapoli on his motor-cycle bearing registration no.HR-60D-4786 for purchasing the articles for the shop. He was driving the motor- cycle while Anil was sitting as a pillion rider. When they reached near Kashigiri temple at Sanoli Road, Panipat, suddenly a trolla came from behind. Its driver was driving the same rashly, negligently and at a high speed and without blowing any horn and the said trolla directly hit their motor-cycle, due to which he fell down towards the left side of the road, while Anil Kumar fell down towards the right side of the road and came under the left side front wheel of the trolla and as a result of which, Anil Kumar succumbed to his injuries on the spot. It was further alleged that he noticed the registration number of the trolla and the same was RJ- 14GF-0355. The driver of the trolla tried to flee from the spot, but he was stopped by Umesh Kumar. Many persons had gathered at the spot and on finding an opportunity, driver of the trolla fled from away the spot. The complainant alleged that he too had sustained injuries in the accident. On the basis of this statement, a case under Sections 279 and 304-A of IPC was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. Inquest proceedings and post-mortem examination on the dead body of victim Anil Kumar was conducted. The accused was arrested on 25.10.2013. The offending vehicle and the motor-cycle were taken into custody by the police. Both the vehicles were got mechanically examined. After completion of necessary investigation and usual formalities, challan under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. was presented in the Court for trial of the accused.

CONTENTIONS

3. Mr. Ajay Ghangas, Advocate appearing for the petitioner contends that he is not assailing the impugned judgment of conviction dated 10.05.2017 on merits and restricts his prayer to modification of the order dated 10.05.2017 on quantum of sentence to that of the sentence already undergone by the petitioner. The petitioner was convicted under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC and awarded substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 ½ years. He has already undergone more than four months of custody. No other case is pending against him prior to the registration of the present FIR nor was he involved in any other criminal case after suspension of his sentence in the present case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that petitioner has reformed and intend to live a fruitful and peaceful life. It is also contended by counsel for the petitioner that there is no minimum sentence provided under Section 279 a