I.S.TIWANA, J. - (1.) THE respondent has concurrently been convicted by the trial and the appellate Courts under Sections 304-A and 337 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of five persons while driving his oil tanker No. PJN 2171 in a rash and negligent manner near Rayya Mandi on G.T. Road on May 9, 1983. Jaswinder Singh (PW1), the 6th occupant of the Flat car (No. MHU-6146) which was smashed by the respondent's tanker just proved to be lucky enough in escaping death but he did suffer some injuries as a result of that collusion. While dismissing the respondent's revision petition No. 1459 of 1986 against the said orders on November 26, 1986. I issued him a notice to show cause as to why the punishment awarded to him be not enhanced. This is how the matter is before me today.
(2.) MR . Hundal, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent urges with great amount of vehemence that the lower appellate Court has given just and sufficient reasons for reducing the sentence of imprisonment as awarded by the trial Court, from two years to one year, under Section 304-A of the Code and the facts of the case do not call for any interference in that regard. He even sought to urge that it was the driver of the car who was at fault and not the respondent. These submissions of the learned Counsel, however, do not impress me. This is how the lower appellate Court has dealt with the matter while granting some relief to the respondent in the matter of punishment :- "As regards the sentence it may be noted that the trial dragged on for three years and this must have caused considerable bother to the appellant who is a resident of Amani. District Hissar, Long trial is punishment enough and sufficient reason for reducing the period of imprisonment from two years to one year RI under Section 304-A IPC. Accordingly, the sentence of the appellant is reduced to one year RI under Section 304-A IPC. The remaining sentence shall remain the same subject to this modification." This leniency shown to the respondent by the lower appellate Court, however, does not commend to me. I have already observed in an earlier petition (Crl. Misc. No. 5200-M of 1982) Court of its own motion v. Ganda Singh decided on May 26, 1983, that it is a matter of common knowledge that Indian transport is acquiring a menacing reputation which makes travel a tryst with death. I also expressed the opinion that in such matters dangerous drivers like the respondent should be kept off the road at least for some number of years and mere sentence of imprisonment of a year or so cannot normally serve the ends of justice. For all the reasons recorded in that in case, I am of the considered view that in the instant case too the petitioner's driving licence should be cancelled at least for a period of five years from today. I, therefore, declare that in addition to the sentence that has already been passed against the respondent, he is disqualified to held a licence to drive a heavy moto vehicle such as a truck or a bus for a period of five years from today. A copy of the order be sent to the Licensing or Renewing Authorities within the jurisdiction of this Court. Order accordingly.;