Full Name
Email ID
(this email-id will be treated as your User ID also)
Address
City
Mobile No
	* Mobile No is required for verification of identity

Head Note

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 304 , Section 338 , Section 337

Rash and negligent drunken driving - In his statement under Section 313 CrPC, appellant admitted that he was driving the car but accident occurred due to failure of engine and mechanical defect - Trial Court convicted him under Sections 304A and 337 - High Court convicted him under Section 304 Part II, Section 338 and Section 337 - Deposition of PW-13, a watchman and an eye-witness, that the car was driven at a high speed and it ran into the pavement, not shaken in cross-examination - Spot panchnama proved by PW-11 and PW-16 - No evidence to doubt their presence or veracity - High Court concluded that the accused was guilty of driving the car rashly and negligently, under the influence of liquor - Held, High Court rightly attributed the appellant with the knowledge that his act was dangerous enough to cause injuries or death of persons sleeping on the pavement - The ingredients of Section 304 Part II IPC stand fully established and the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 304

Appellant only 20 years old at the time of incident - Sentence of two months already undergone - Fine and compensation of Rs. 8,50,000/- paid - Appellant willing to pay more - His father died during pendency of appeal and he is the only supporting family member - Principle of proportionality - Held, proportion between crime and punishment is most relevant to determination of sentence. Social interest also is to be considered. Drunken driving is a major cause for road accidents and India has registered maximum number of such deaths - There is a need to reconsider the sentencing policy in Section 304A - In view of the fact that Seven people died in the accident, sentence of three years is too meager - However in absence of appeal by State, enhancement of sentence not considered - Benefit of being released on probation or reduction in sentence to period already undergone, denied.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 304-A , Section 304 , Section 338 , Section 337 , The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  - Section 464

Rash and negligent driving - Car ran into people sleeping on the pavement - 7 people killed and eight injured - Charge-sheet - No mention of appellant's drunken state in the charge-sheet - Examination by PW1, doctor, showed that he had consumed liquor - Questions in his examination under Section 313 CrPc show that the appellant was aware of the prosecution evidence relating to his rash and negligent driving in the drunken state - Omission of the words 'in drunken condition' in the charge was not material and no prejudice caused to the appellant - Appellant had full opportunity to say what he wanted to say. Cases of Asraf Ali, Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Jai Dev referred.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 304-A , Section 304 , Section 338 , Section 337

Rash and negligent driving by appellant in an inebriated condition - Seven people killed and eight injured - Trial court convicting under Sections 304A and 337 - Conviction by High Court under Section 304 Part II, Section 338 and Section 337 - Justification - Whether indictment of an accused under Sections 304 Part II and 338 co-exist - Held, yes - The two charges are not mutually destructive - Sections like 304A, 336, 337 and 338 get attracted when a negligent and rash act is done and these sections make such act punishable - But If the act is done with the knowledge of its dangerous consequences and if death is caused then not only the act should be punished but punishment should be given for the resulting homicide under Section 304 Part II - Therefore no incongruity will result if the offender, alongwith punishment under Section 304 Part II for the rash or negligent act which endangered human life and caused grievous hurt to any person is tried for the offence under Section 338 simultaneously - The appellant was fully aware of the charges against him and no prejudice was caused to him.

Topic(s)-Rash and negligent drunken driving

Important Decision(s)- 

• Conviction - Section 304 Part II, 338 and 337 IPC - Proper.
• Whether indictment of an accused under Sections 304 Part II and 338 co-exist - Held, yes.
• Sections 304A, 304 Part II, 338 & 337 IPC - Omission of the words 'in drunken condition' in the charge was not material.
• Sections 304A, 304 Part II, 338 & 337 IPC - Section 313 CrPC, admitted that he was driving the car but accident occurred due to failure of engine and mechanical defect - Conviction proper.