Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABDUL SATTAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME & ANR. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judgment addresses delay and review of sentencing. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. examination of the conviction and necessary compensation adjustments. (Para 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court addresses family needs and financial obligations. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. final decision to dispose of the appeal. (Para 10) |
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
3. The special leave petition was filed which was dismissed vide order dated 11.03.2024. However, on a submission made by the review petitioner for payment of amount of compensation to the family of the deceased, notice on the review petition was issued. The review petition is allowed and the special leave petition is restored to file in its original number.
4. Leave granted.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and considered the fact that a 13 years old boy had died in the accident due to negligence of the appellant. The provision of Section 304(A) does not mandatorily prescribe a sentence. Therefore, in lieu of the sentence required to be served by the appellant, if he makes a payment of fine of Rs.3,00,000/- in toto, the sentence may be commuted and the amount of fine, so deposited shall be used as compensation to the family of the deceased boy.
8.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
