“He Has A Bright Future”: Bombay HC Grants Probation To Man Convicted U/S 304A IPC
The Bombay High Court granted probation to a convict accused of causing the death of an older woman in a motor vehicle accident, observing that the accused had a bright future.
The Court upheld the conviction of the driver of the motorbike (accused), who was 18 years old at the time of the accident, under Section 304A of the IPC and Section 3, 181, 50(1), 177, 3, 4 and 180 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA). The Court stated that the accused was a “teenager” who might have driven the new vehicle for the first time and lost control in the “excitement and happiness,” while granting him probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (the Act).
A Single Bench of Justice S.G. Mehare observed, “His age and the way in which the accident happened are the peculiar facts to be considered in this case. He has a bright future. He is apprehensive about the stigma of conviction that may ruin his future. The mens rea is absent in such cases. He was a first-time offender and had no antecedents. Therefore, without disregarding the Probation of Offenders Act, this Court is of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is expedient to release him on probation under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to the Petitioner.”
Sr. Advocate V.D. Sapkal appeared for the petitioner, while APP P.J. Bharad represented the respondent.
The accused challenged the judgments of the Judicial Magistrate and the Sessions Court, both of which found him guilty of causing the death of a woman through rash and negligent driving.
During the trial, the prosecution presented testimonies from the eyewitness, ‘spot panch,’ and the investigation officer. The accused argued that the exact location of the accident was not proven and suggested that the deceased, already suffering from leg ailments, might have fallen and sustained the injury independently of the alleged rash driving.
The Aurangabad Bench noted that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased died of the injuries sustained in the motor vehicular accident caused by the accused. “The explanation for the delay in lodging the report was probable. Examining both judgments, the Court is of the view that they have correctly held that the ingredients of Section 304-A have been proved. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur also supports the prosecution,” the Court added.
Although the prosecution strongly opposed extending the benefit of the probation to the accused, the Court pointed out that there was no absolute bar on extending the benefit of Section 4 of the Act to an accused convicted under Section 304-A of the IPC.
“The peculiar facts and circumstances of this case were that the Petitioner had just completed 18 years. He was a teenager, and in the excitement and happiness, he might have driven the new vehicle for the first time and lost control. In the ordinary course, he had no reason to take the vehicle away from the road and cause an accident,” the Court remarked.
Consequently, the Court held, “Petitioner, who is held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/181, 50(1)/177 and 3, 4/180 of the Motor Vehicles Act is maintained…However, instead of sentencing the Petitioner at once to any punishment, he is released on entering into a bond with one surety for one year to receive the sentence when called upon during the above period and, in the meantime, maintain peace and good behaviour.”
Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the application.
Cause Title: Akshay v. The State of Maharashtra (Neutral Citation: 2024:BHC-AUG:14190)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Sr. Advocate V.D. Sapkal; Advocate S.R. Sapkal
Respondent: APP P.J. Bharad