Road Accident- Court Shouldn't Award Flea-Bite Sentence For Offence U/S 304-A IPC By Showing Undue Sympathy: MP High Court

Dismissing the criminal revision plea of a convict who hit a bike in a rash and negligent manner thereby causing the death of two persons, the Madhya Pradesh High Court last week noted that the court should not award a flea-bite sentence for offence under Section 304-A of IPC by showing undue sympathy.

Section 304-A Indian Penal Code deals with Causing death by negligence [Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both]

This assertion came from the bench of Justice G. S. Ahluwalia that observed that the convict wasn't even eligible for a reduction of the jail sentence as two persons lost their lives due to the applicant/convict, who was solely negligent in causing the accident by hitting the motorcycle by coming from the wrong direction.

The background of the case

The Court was dealing with a Criminal Revision filed against the judgment and sentence dated September 15, 2021, passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ganjbasoda, Link Court Kurvai, District Vidisha, affirming the judgment and sentence, by which the applicant had been convicted for 279, 338 and 304-A of IPC.

It was submitted by the counsel for the applicant that four persons, i.e. two males and one woman were riding on a motorcycle along with a minor girl and thus, it was clear that they themselves were negligent as only two persons can ride on a motorcycle.

It was further submitted that in fact, no accident had taken place from the motorcycle of the applicant and since the driver of the motorcycle could not control the motorcycle, therefore, it slipped, and as a result, two persons riding on the said motorcycle died on the spot.

Court's observations 

Perusing the post mortem report, the Bench observed that the deceased (Priti and Chandrashekhar) had sustained multiple external and internal injuries including multiple fractures, as a result, they died on the spot, and that the death of both persons was accidental in nature.

Further, taking into account the spot map prepared by the police, the Court concluded that the accident took place on the extreme side of the road, and thus, the Court held thus:

"...the evidence of the witnesses that the deceased was driving the vehicle on the extreme left side, whereas the applicant hit the motorcycle by coming from the wrong side appears to be correct."

The Court further noted that according to the applicant himself, the deceased persons were on their left side and since the accident took place on the extreme left side of the road, therefore, the Court concluded as follows :

"...it is clear that the applicant was driving the motorcycle in a wrong direction and hit the motorcycle of the deceased Chandrashekhar, while they were on the extreme left side of the road. Thus, it is the applicant who was at fault. Merely because three male persons and one minor girl were riding on the motorcycle, would not give any authority to the applicant to hit the said motorcycle by coming from the wrong direction."

Concludingly, the Court opined that it was the applicant himself, who was driving the offending vehicle and by coming from the wrong side, hit the motorcycle of the deceased, resulting in the death of two persons.

As the findings of facts recorded by the Courts below cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the record, accordingly, the Court upheld the conviction of the applicant for the offences under Sections 279, 338, and 304-A of IPC.

Case title - Devendra Valmiki Vs. State of M.P.

Click here To Download Order

Read Order