Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Asarat Ali Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Asarat Ali vs The State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Apr 17, 2001
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/772575

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Cr. Revision No. 172 of 2001
Subject
Motor Vehicles;Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 158(6) & 166(4)--Motor Accident Claim--High Court, while hearing revision against conviction and sentence Under Sections 304-A & 279 IPC, apprised that no claim petition was filed in the matter--Direction given to Registry of the High Court to transmit the record to the Mo...

Key legal issue
Motor Vehicles;Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Asarat Ali

Respondent

The State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
2007(3)WLN170

Excerpt

motor vehicles act, 1988 - sections 158(6) & 166(4)--motor accident claim--high court, while hearing revision against conviction and sentence under sections 304-a & 279 ipc, apprised that no claim petition was filed in the matter--direction given to registry of the high court to transmit the record to the motor accidents claims tribunal and the tribunal to decide the matter expeditiously.;revision petition partly allowed - - 2. having perused the impugned judgment, statements of the eye witness pw-5 ratna ram, site inspection memo, the mechanical examination report of the truck and the cycle, i am satisfied that the learned courts below have not committed any error in convicting the petitioner for the offence under section 304-a and 279 ipc......am satisfied that the learned courts below have not committed any error in convicting the petitioner for the offence under section 304-a and 279 ipc.3. learned counsel for the petitioner then contends that the sentence awarded is excessive and is required to be substantially reduced.4. looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the sentence awarded by the learned courts below is the maximum permitted sentence, i am inclined to reduce the sentence. in my view, the ends of justice would be met if the sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence under section 304-a ipc is reduced to imprisonment for a period of six months while maintaining the fine.5. accordingly the revision petition is partly allowed, while maintaining the conviction and sentence for the offence under section 279 ipc, the substantial sentence awarded under section 304-a ipc is reduced to the period of six months.6. i am told by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no claim petition has been filed under the motor vehicles act for compensation resulting from the accident. in these circumstances, in view of the provisions of section 158(6) of the motor vehicles act, 1988 as amended on 14.11.1994, it is directed that the registry shall forward the record of the learned trial court to the motor accident claims tribunal, jodhpur for registering the claim petition against the owner and the driver and insurer, if any. the learned claims tribunal shall treat it as a claim petition within the meaning of section 166(4) of the motor vehicles act, 1988, shall try and decide the claim on merits expeditiously. the learned tribunal may retain the photostat copies of such of the documents from the record as may be necessary for proper adjudication of the claim, and then return the original record to the learned trial court or it may retain the record till adjudication of the claim, as it may think appropriate.

Full Judgment

N.P. Gupta, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record.

2. Having perused the impugned judgment, statements of the eye witness PW-5 Ratna Ram, Site Inspection Memo, the Mechanical Examination Report of the Truck and the Cycle, I am satisfied that the learned courts below have not committed any error in convicting the petitioner for the offence Under Section 304-A and 279 IPC.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner then contends that the sentence awarded is excessive and is required to be substantially reduced.

4. Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the sentence awarded by the learned courts below is the maximum permitted sentence, I am inclined to reduce the sentence. In my view, the ends of justice would be met if the sentence awarded to the petitioner for offence Under Section 304-A IPC is reduced to imprisonment for a period of six months while maintaining the fine.

5. Accordingly the revision petition is partly allowed, while maintaining the conviction and sentence for the offence Under Section 279 IPC, the substantial sentence awarded Under Section 304-A IPC is reduced to the period of six months.

6. I am told by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that no claim petition has been filed under the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation resulting from the accident. In these circumstances, in view of the provisions of Section 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as amended on 14.11.1994, it is directed that the Registry shall forward the record of the learned trial court to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur for registering the claim petition against the owner and the driver and insurer, if any. The learned Claims Tribunal shall treat it as a claim petition within the meaning of Section 166(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, shall try and decide the claim on merits expeditiously. The learned Tribunal may retain the Photostat copies of such of the documents from the record as may be necessary for proper adjudication of the claim, and then return the original record to the learned trial court or it may retain the record till adjudication of the claim, as it may think appropriate.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial