- (1.)THE applicant was tried for offences punishable under sections 304-A I. P. C. and section 116 of the Motor Vehicle Act, by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Khandala. Vide order dated 12-1-90 he was found guilty for the said offences and was sentenced to undergo one year R. I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default of payment of fine, to suffer S. I. for three months under the first count and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine to suffer S. I. for one month under the second count. The applicant challenged his convictions and sentences in Sessions Court, Satara and vide judgment dated 2-7-92, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1990, decided by the IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Satara, the applicants sentence was reduced to 3 months R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, S. I. for one month under section 304-A I. P. C. The sentence in default of payment of fine under section 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act was reduced to 10 days S. I. Hence this revision.
(2.)THE concurrent finding of the courts below is that, on 24-2-87, at about 4. 00 p. m. , the applicant was driving his truck in a rash and negligent manner and the consequence of the said act was that, Kausalya, daughter of complainant Somnath, aged about 3 years, met with an accident on the road leading to Gram Panchayat. It is said that she succumbed to the injuries on the spot. I have perused the impugned judgments and the evidence on record. I find that the said finding of fact recorded by the courts below is based on good evidence. The evidence of two of the eye witnesses viz. Somnath and Digambar, P. Ws. 1 and 2 respectively shows that Kausalya was standing near the cot by the side of the road when the applicant driving his bus at a fast speed, dashed against her. The learned Counsel for the applicant failed to satisfy me that the assessment of the evidence of these two witnesses by the courts below was perverse. In my view, the courts below have rightly found the applicant guilty for the said offences.
(3.)NOW only one question remains viz. that of sentence. Mr. R. S. Mohite, learned Counsel for the applicant urged that since the incident took place more than 10 years ago and there is nothing to indicate that the applicant is a previous convict, the ends of justice would be met if the jail sentence for offence under section 304-A I. P. C. is reduced to the period already undergone by him and in lieu thereof, some fine is imposed. I am inclined to accede to his submission. In my view, the ends of justice would be adequately satisfied if the jail sentence of the applicant for the offence under section 304-A I. P. C. is reduced to the period already undergone by him and in lieu thereof, he is directed to pay an additional fine of Rs. 10,000/- which shall be paid as compensation to the father of the deceased i. e. Somnath Shripati Jadhav, P. W. 1 and in case, he is not alive, to the legal heirs.