No Minimum Sentence For Conviction U/s.304(A) & 338 Of IPC: Apex Court Reduces Sentence Of Convict In Rash Driving Case, Orders Immediate Release

The Supreme Court has reduced the sentence of a convict charged with causing the death of a pillion rider in a motorcycle accident due to his rash and negligent driving, ordering his immediate release.

The Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma substituted the original sentence with a fine, taking into account the time the convict had already spent in custody.

"..the appellant was arrested on 10.05.2024 and by now, he has been in custody for about 117 days. Considering the circumstances, while upholding the conviction of the appellant, we deem it appropriate to modify the sentence to the period already undergone, in the interest of justice. Ordered accordingly," the Bench ordered.

The appellant, convicted under Sections 279, 337, 338, and 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for a road accident resulting in the death of a pillion rider, was arrested on May 10, 2024, and had already served 117 days in custody. The allegation was that the appellant, driving a mini lorry, collided with a motorcycle coming from the opposite direction, leading to the death of the pillion rider due to grievous injuries sustained in the accident.

The Court noted that under Section 304(A) of the IPC, which deals with causing death by negligence, there is no mandatory minimum sentence, and the punishment may extend to two years or a fine. The same applies to Section 338 (causing grievous hurt by endangering life), while Sections 279 and 337, related to rash driving and causing hurt, prescribe a maximum punishment of six months, which may also be substituted by a fine.

In the impugned judgment, the Kerala High Court had upheld the conviction and sentenced the appellant to six months of simple imprisonment. Additionally, based on an assurance given by the appellant’s counsel, the Court had ordered him to pay Rs. 2.5 lakhs as compensation to the victim's family.

However, the Apex Court modified the High Court's judgment, reducing the sentence to the time already served and reducing the compensation to Rs. 50,000. The Court accepted the appellant's plea to lower the compensation amount, citing his poor financial condition and severe medical issues.

"Insofar as the direction in the impugned judgment, for payment of compensation of Rs. 2.5 lakhs, the learned counsel would point out that the appellant is a poor person and is now aged around 69 years. He has several medical issues, and therefore the compensation sum be either waived or be reduced. In the peculiar facts of this case, while upholding the conviction, we reduce the compensation payable by the appellant to Rs. 50,000/-. This amount should be deposited before the trial court within 60 days of the release of the appellant. The trial court should then arrange for remitting the amount to the victim’s family," the Court said in its order dated September 3.

The Bench, while relying on the Supreme Court's previous ruling in Surendran v. Sub-Inspector of Police (LL 2021 SC 279), noted that there is no mandatory minimum sentence for the offences under Sections 304(A) and 338, allowing for the imposition of a fine in lieu of imprisonment.

"Following the above, and the modification of sentence to the period undergone, the appellant, who is lodged currently in the Central Prison and Correctional Home, Thiruvananthapuram, is ordered to be released forthwith. The appeal is disposed of with this order,” the Court directed.

Cause Title: George v. State of Kerala [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 11041/2024]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: AOR P. A. Noor Muhamed, Advocates Giffara S., M. Shareef Kp, Ck Prasad, A. Shukoor, A. Nowfal, Ka Shereef, Avaneesh Koyikkara

Respondent: Advocates Harshad V Hameed, Dileep Poolakkot, Ashly Harshad, Farhad Tehmu Marolia

Click here to read/download the Order