STATE OF PUNJAB v. BALWINDER SINGH ETC. INSC 8

State of Punjab v. Balwinder Singh 6th January, 2012 J. Chelameswar, P. Sathasivam

Facts The appellants filed the case against the judgement and order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in a Criminal Revision Petition for nature of offence and quantum of sentence wherein the High Court partly allowed the revision petition and reduced the quantum of sentence awarded by the Judicial Magistrate. The Respondent was driving a at very high speed which collided with a truck coming from the opposite side at a high side in. Both the drivers were driving in a rash and negligent manner due to which 5 people lost their lives post the collision.

Issues Whether the High Court was justified in reducing the sentence from rigorous imprisonment to the period already undergone? Whether the High Court's decision to impose an enhanced fine in lieu of rigorous imprisonment serves as an adequate deterrent and punishment for the offence?

Holding The Court disagreed with the reasoning of the High Court in reducing the sentence of imprisonment and set aside the impugned order of the High Court and imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months with a fine of Rs 5,000/- each. Additionally the Trial Court was directed to take appropriate steps for surrender of the accused in both the appeals to serve the remaining period of the sentence.

Rationale The Court invoked the principle laid down in Dalbir Singh v. State of Haryana, which heled that one of the most effective ways to ensure accountability among drivers is by maintaining a deterrent while giving a sentence. It was observed by the Court that any leniency in sentencing could encourage reckless and frivolous driving and hence risk public safety. The Court went on to address the increase in road accidents and reiterated that that offences arising from motor accidents should not be equated with those falling under Section 304A of the IPC which attracts the more lenient provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The Court emphasized that deterrence should be the primary consideration while determining the appropriate sentence for causing death or injury due to rash and negligent driving and hence as a measure to curb the rising rates of motor accidents caused by careless driving all relevant facts and circumstances likely to effect the sentencing should be taken into consideration. Additionally the Court stated that the enhanced amount of Rs.25,000/- each was not sufficient ground to drastically reduce the sentence in a case where five people died due to negligent act of both drivers.