SC: “Unjustified Compassion Unsustainable When Objective of IPC is to Punish Offenders” HC Judgment on Motor Accident Case Quashed

Last Updated on April 7, 2023 by Administrator

Issue

In overturning a decision by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to reduce a sentence imposed on a man convicted in a motor accident case of rash driving and causing death due to negligence, the Supreme Court stated that the Indian Penal Code is punitive and deterrent with its primary aim and object being punishing offenders for committing offences under the act. The apex court panel unequivocally ruled that the “undue sympathy” displayed by the high court was unjustifiable and that its ruling should be interfered with.

Facts of the case

This appeal resulted from a car collision that the accused driver caused by driving “recklessly and negligently.” One person lost their life due to his reckless driving, and two others were hurt when an ambulance turned turtle. Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code were utilised to condemn the defendant. Despite the fact that the top court upheld his conviction, it decided to modify the lower court’s sentence due to the accused’s financial situation and his employment as a car driver.

Arguments

One innocent individual lost his life, and two other passengers in the ambulance were hurt as a result of the accused’s reckless and careless driving. The high court also failed to adequately take into account the fact that the ambulance turned turtle after the incident, which only highlights the effect on the ambulance and the accused’s hasty and careless driving.

Reasoning

This court has emphasised the need to severely punish criminals who cause motor vehicle accidents. India is seeing a rising burden of traffic injuries and fatalities as the country’s motorization rate increases quickly. A family’s financial loss, mental distress, and social isolation brought on by the death of the family’s primary provider or another family member or by the victim’s disability cannot be measured. It is important to keep in mind the proportionality principle between the offence and punishment. The foundation of sentencing for a criminal offence is the notion of just punishment.

Judgement

The panel ultimately upheld the state of Punjab’s appeal, stating that the high court’s “undue compassion” was unjustified and that the impugned ruling deserved to be revoked and overturned as a result.

Provisions used in the case

• Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code. 

Case: State of Punjab v. Dil Bahadur 

Written By – Nikita Shankar