Road Accident | Letting Off Negligent Ambulance Driver With Only Fine Would Be Unjust To Victims And Whole Society: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has refused to reduce sentence of six month simple imprisonment imposed on an ambulance driver convicted for driving in a rash and negligent manner and causing an accident leading to death of one person and injuring three others in the year 2011. A single judge bench of Justice Umesh M Adiga dismissed the revision petition filed by S. Santhosh Poojari...
The Karnataka High Court has refused to reduce sentence of six month simple imprisonment imposed on an ambulance driver convicted for driving in a rash and negligent manner and causing an accident leading to death of one person and injuring three others in the year 2011.
A single judge bench of Justice Umesh M Adiga dismissed the revision petition filed by S. Santhosh Poojari and said,
“Prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that due to the negligent driving of the ambulance by the petitioner an accident had taken place resulting in death of the driver of the car and grievous injuries to all the three occupants of the car. It indicates the speed in which the ambulance might be driven by the accused. If such an accused is dealt with by imposing a nominal sentence of fine of a few hundred rupees, then it would be injustice to the society as well as victims of the accident.”
The petitioner had challenged the conviction order passed by the trial court on merits and in the alternative prayed that considering his social responsibilities he may be imposed with fine only as sentence.
The High Court noted that if relief is granted to petitioner, it would encourage negligent riders/drivers. It observed,
“The revision petitioner due to his negligent driving caused the death of one of the occupants of the car and also caused grievous injury to other three occupants of the car. If only a sentence of fine is imposed, then it would be a nominal punishment against the offence committed by him. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is not fit case to give the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act and imposition of nominal fine amount to the accused/revision petitioner.”
As per the prosecution case, the accused being the driver of ambulance vehicle drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against an Alto car. The impact of the accident caused sustained grievous injuries to Alto driver who succumbed to death. Three others were also injured.
On going through the evidence of the witnesses the bench held, “The trial Court has considered all the materials available on record and rightly held that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of ambulance by its driver. It is not in serious dispute that PW2 and 3 had sustained grievous injuries and one Prakash driver of car was dead at the spot. The Wound Certificate and postmortem report corroborates the said fact. The learned appellate Judge re-appreciated material available on record and concurred with findings of the trial Court. It is well reasoned findings and not calls for interference by this Court in the Revision Petition.”
Appearance: Advocate Girish B Baladare for Petitioner.
HCGP Divakar Maddur M for Respondent
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 214
Case Title: S Santosh Poojari AND State By Mudigere Police
Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 600 OF 2017