About appellant and the fact of the case
The Appellant in question is Muthupandi. He was charged under Sections 279 and 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
According to the prosecution case, the accident that occurred was a result of a truck hitting cows and a person named Karthik who was accompanying the cows. It happened on the Nilakottai to Madurai road, near Karigalan petrol pump.
About FIR
The First Information Report (FIR) filed in this case was numbered 08 of 2013 and was registered on 09.01.2013 under Sections 279, 304(A) of IPC read with Section 4(1)(A) read with Section 21(1)(A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act was registered since the prosecution had a case that river sand was being carried illegally.
Trial court judgment
The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 279 and 304(A) of the IPC and imposed a sentence of one-year simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under Section 304(A) of the IPC. For the offence under Section 279 of the IPC, the appellant was sentenced, by imposing a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Appropriate default sentences were also imposed.
Hon’ble Supreme Court on witness analysis and sentence (compensation)
The Hon’ble Supreme Court examined the evidence of the eye-witnesses, who consistently testified that the appellant drove the lorry in a rash and negligent manner, causing the death of the deceased and six cows. The witnesses denied the suggestion that the cattle were running on the road due to being frightened by the light and that Karthik died from being trampled by the cows.
The Apex Court considered the long duration (11 years) since the incident and the fact that the appellant had been on bail throughout. The Apex Court noted that the witnesses and the deceased were managing about 70 cattle on the road at the time of the incident. While the Court did not absolve the appellant of rash and negligent driving, it considered these factors when considering the sentence. The appellant had deposited Rs. 1,00,000/- to be paid to the mother of the deceased, who is the sole legal heir of the deceased.
Hon’ble Supreme Court has invoked section 357 (3) Cr.P.C
The Supreme Court, while upholding the conviction of Muthupandi/appellant for rash and negligent driving set aside the sentence of three months simple imprisonment and the fines imposed. Instead, the Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered that the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- deposited by the appellant be paid to the deceased’s mother as compensation. This decision was made in light of the case’s special circumstances, which is the long duration since the incident and the appellant’s continuous bail status. The Court exercised its powers under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C. to provide this compensation.
Party
Muthupandi vs. State of T.N – CRIMINAL APPEAL No. _________ of 2024 (@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 16486 of 2023) – (2024) INSC 950 – December 10, 2024
