Recently, the Supreme Court directed the release of a convict, who had been charged with causing the death of a motorcycle pillion rider due to rash and negligent driving, by reducing his sentence to the period already served in custody. The Court said, “For conviction under Section 304(A) and Section 338 of the IPC, there is no minimum sentence prescribed but the term of sentence may extend to 2 years”.
Brief Facts:
The appellant was convicted of offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304(A) of the IPC for a road accident. The charges were related to reckless driving that caused a collision with a motorcycle and injuries to pedestrians, resulting in one death. The Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Alappuzha sentenced the driver to various terms of simple imprisonment and fines, with sentences to run concurrently. The Additional Sessions Judge-II upheld the conviction, Alappuzha, and the High Court dismissed the criminal revision. The appellant, who had been in custody for 103 days, sought relief, leading to a returnable notice by the Supreme Court.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The Counsel for the appellant contended that several witnesses at the scene became hostile, thereby limiting their testimony to merely establishing the occurrence of the accident. The appellant’s identification relied solely on the testimony of a motorcyclist who claimed to have observed the appellant exiting the driver’s seat of the mini lorry. Despite being thrown from the collision, the motorcyclist was conscious at the time.
The counsel also highlighted a discrepancy in the motorcyclist’s statements. In his initial statement to the police, the lorry driver was described as elderly, a detail not reflected in his testimony during the trial. The counsel contended that this inconsistency constitutes a contradiction under Section 162(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Observation of the Court :
The Court observed that the appellant, aged around 52 at the time of the accident, did not significantly contradict the description of the driver as elderly, as per the motorcyclist’s statements, thus not warranting the benefit of Section 162(2) of the Cr.P.C. The court noted that the primary charge against the appellant was causing death by rash and negligent driving, which falls under Section 304(A) and 338 of the IPC. For these offences, the sentence can extend up to 2 years, or be limited to a fine. For Sections 279 and 337 of the IPC, the maximum punishment is 6 months or a fine, the court states, “ For conviction under Section 304(A) and Section 338 of the IPC, there is no minimum sentence prescribed but the term of sentence may extend to 2 years”.
The court noted that the High Court upheld the conviction, sentencing the appellant to 6 months of imprisonment and ordering him to pay Rs. 2.5 lakhs in compensation to the victim’s family, as per the assurance provided by his counsel. The court highlighted the judgement of the Supreme Court in ‘Surendran v. Sub-Inspector of Police [(2021) 17 SCC 799], it is held that for convictions under Section 279 and 338 of the IPC, the sentence should be substituted with a fine only, considering the long period since the accident (over 26 years) and the fact that the accused was on bail throughout the trial.
The decision of the Court :
The Court upheld the conviction, reduced the compensation to Rs. 50,000 and adjusted the appellant’s sentence to time served, ordering immediate release.
Case Title: GEORGE V. STATE OF KERALA
Citation: Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 11041/2024
Coram: Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. P. A. Noor Muhamed (AOR), Giffara S., M. Shareef K.P, C.K. Prasad, A. Shukoor, A. Nowfal, K.A. Shereef, Avaneesh Koyikkara
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Harshad V Hameed, Dileep Poolakkot, Ashly Harshad, Farhad Tehmu Marolia
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
