Section 338 IPC| Human Life Was Endangered Due To Negligence Of Bus Conductor: SC Modifies Sentence In 2005 Case
|The Supreme Court while dealing with an appeal sentenced the Appellant to Six Months Imprisonment under Section 338, Indian Penal Code (IPC), modifying it from the initial conviction under Section 308, IPC.
A Two Judge Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal held that “In the absence of intention and knowledge as contemplated by Section 299 of IPC, the offence of attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder was not made out”.
But due to the negligence of the Appellant, injuries were caused for which the Court stated “the appellant acted rashly and negligently as he did not perform his duty of being careful. we are of the view that the appellant is guilty of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 338 of IPC”.
AOR Zulfiker Ali P. S appeared for the Appellant while AOR Harshad V. Hameed appeared for the Respondent.
In this case, the Appellant was Accused No. 2 in the Sessions Court Trial. Appellant was a conductor of a school bus. Accused No. 1 was the driver and Accused No. 3 was the cleaner. While at a bus stop, some students were boarding the bus when the Appellant rang the bell due to which the driver started driving the bus. One of the students (PW-1) suffered injuries as she was halfway through boarding and fell down.
The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the driver – Accused No. 1. However, he convicted the Appellant and Accused No. 3 for the offence punishable under Section 308 read with Section 34 of IPC.
The Appellant and Accused No. 3 challenged the same in the High Court. The High Court acquitted Accused No. 3. While confirming the conviction of the Appellant under Section 308 of IPC, the sentence was brought down to one year by directing him to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/.
Following this, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Apex Court.
The question before the Court was whether an offence under Section 308, IPC was made out. The Court while examining the evidence stated that “in the absence of intention and knowledge as contemplated by Section 299 of IPC, the offence of attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder was not made out.”
By applying the principles of subsection (2) of Section 222, CrPC, through which the Court can consider whether the appellant has committed any other offence which is a minor offence in comparison to the offence for which he is tried.
The Court held that “The appellant knew that at the relevant bus stop, a large number of students were waiting to take the bus. However, he did not verify whether the passengers had properly boarded the bus. Therefore, he is guilty of negligence as he failed to perform his duty”.
Determining the punishment, the Court stated “Impugned judgments are modified insofar as the appellant–accused No.2 is concerned. Instead of Section 308 of IPC, he is held guilty of an offence punishable under Section 338 of the IPC. The appellant shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant shall pay a total amount of Rs.75,000/ out of which a sum of Rs.50,000/ has already been deposited.”
Accordingly, the Court partly allowed the appeal.
Cause Title: Abdul Ansar v. State of Kerala