Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has spared a man from serving a three-month simple imprisonment sentence in a case of rash and negligent driving that resulted in a fatality. This decision followed his deposit of Rs 1 lakh as compensation to the victim's family.

A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Vishwanathan observed that the incident, which occurred 11 years ago, involved the deceased and witnesses navigating a herd of 70 cows on the road. The bench also noted that the appellant had remained out of custody throughout the trial.

"In view of the special facts of this case, while upholding the conviction, we set aside the sentence of three months simple imprisonment," the bench said.

The court allowed Muthupandi's appeal partly on the ground of sentence while upholding his conviction for offences punishable under Section 279 and 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

The appellant challenged the Madras High Court's Madurai bench judgment which maintained his conviction but modified the sentence to that of three months simple imprisonment. The judicial magistrate had convicted him and sentenced him to one year imprisonment with a total fine of Rs 6,000. Additional Sessions Judge, Dindigul had confirmed the conviction and the sentence imposed by the trial court.

Before the apex court, the appellant on December 13, 2023, offered to deposit an amount of Rs One Lakh towards compensation to the kin of the deceased. The amount was since deposited in the fixed deposit.

The legal representative of the deceased was impleaded but no one entered appearance.

The case of the prosecution was that on January 09, 2013, at about 05:15 AM, the deceased, namely Karthik and three other witnesses were taking their cows for grazing. While they were proceeding on the Nilakottai to Madurai road, near Karigalan petrol pump, the appellant drove his lorry in a rash and negligent manner and hit the cows as well as the deceased. In view of the mishap, Karthik died and six cows were also killed.

An FIR under Sections 279, 304(A) of IPC read with Section 4(1)(A) read with Section 21(1)(A) of the Mine and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act was registered since the prosecution had a case that river sand was being carried illegally. The appellant, however, was acquitted of charges under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act.

"We have examined the evidence of the eye-witnesses and they are consistent in their story that the appellant drove the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and caused the death of the deceased as well as the six cows. The witnesses have expressly denied the suggestion that the cattle were running on the road afraid of the light and Karthik had died due to the trampling of the cows," the bench said.

The bench, however, felt inclined to allow the appeal partly on the ground of sentence.

"The incident is of the year 2013. Eleven years have elapsed since the incident occurred. The appellant has been on bail throughout. It also emerges from the case of the prosecution that the witnesses and the deceased were negotiating about 70 cattle on the road. While we do not absolve the appellant from the act of rash and negligent driving, we certainly want to keep the above factors in mind while considering the sentence," the bench said.

The court also set aside the fine amount of Rs 6,000.

"Instead, while maintaining the conviction, we order that the amount of Rs 1,00,000 deposited in this court along with interest be paid to Mrs Ponnalaghu W/o Vellaisamy (mother of the deceased). This is on account of the loss suffered by her on account of the act of the appellant and we pass this order in exercise of powers under Section 357(3) of the CrPC," the bench said.

The court directed the amount of Rs one lakh should be transferred to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul, who should direct the respondent-the Inspector of Police, Nilakottai Station, Dindigul to reach out to the mother of the deceased and release the amount along with accrued interest to the mother of the deceased after being satisfied about her identity.

Case Title: Muthupandi Vs State Through Inspector of Police, Nilakottai Station, Dindigul