Delhi High Court: While considering the question of sentence in the
tragic cases of death caused by rash or negligent driving of
automobiles, the Court held that for deciding the quantum of sentence in
such cases one of the prime consideration should be deterrence. A
professional driver should not take a chance thinking that even if he is
convicted, he would be dealt with leniently by the Court. It is settled
law that sentencing must have a policy of correction. A good driver
must have training in traffic laws and moral responsibility with
special reference to the potential injury to human life and limb.
The
Court said that considering the increased number of road accidents, the
criminal courts dealing with the offences relating to motor accidents
cannot treat the nature of such an offence under Section 304A of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, as attracting the benevolent provisions of
Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
In the
present case driver of the offending vehicle while driving rashly and
negligently at a high speed, hit the victim causing his death and was
apprehended at the spot. A question arose whether the accused could be
released on probation, the Court held that when automobiles have become
death traps any leniency shown to drivers who are found guilty of rash
driving would be at the risk of further escalation of road accidents. It
was said that all those who man the steering of automobiles,
particularly professional drivers, must be kept under constant reminders
of their duty to adopt utmost care and also of the consequences
befalling them in cases of dereliction. The most effective ways of
keeping such drivers under mental vigil is to maintain a deterrent
element in sentencing. Any latitude shown to them in that sphere would
tempt them to make driving frivolous and frolic. Hence the petitioner is
not entitled to be released on probation. [Ganga Dhar v. State, CRL.
REV. P. No. 695 of 2013, decided on December 6, 2013]
No comments:
Post a Comment