Case Note & Summary
The judgment pertains to two criminal appeals arising from a common judgment of the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No.257/2012 dated 09.10.2012. The first appeal (Criminal Appeal No.509/2013) was filed by Deepak s/o Naresh Gedam, who was convicted for offences under Section 304 Part II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), Section 338 (causing grievous hurt by act endangering life), Section 427 (mischief causing damage) of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 181, 184, and 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act (driving without license, rash driving, and drunk driving). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years for the Section 304 Part II offence, with other sentences running concurrently. The second appeal (Criminal Appeal No.489/2012) was filed by Hitendra s/o Madhukar Ukey, the owner of the vehicle involved, challenging the trial court's order of confiscation and auction of the vehicle and distribution of sale proceeds to the heirs of the deceased. The facts of the case involve the accused Deepak Gedam driving a vehicle rashly and negligently while under the influence of alcohol, resulting in the death of one person and injuries to others. The trial court convicted him based on evidence including eyewitness testimony and medical reports. The High Court, after hearing arguments, upheld the conviction and sentence of Deepak Gedam, finding no merit in his appeal. However, the court allowed the appeal of Hitendra Ukey, setting aside the order of confiscation and auction of the vehicle, directing that the vehicle be returned to its owner. The court reasoned that the vehicle belonged to Hitendra Ukey, who was not the accused, and there was no legal provision for confiscation under the circumstances. The judgment was delivered by Justice V. M. Deshpande on 10.09.2015.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Rash and negligent act causing death - The accused, while driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, caused the death of one person and injuries to others - The court upheld the conviction, holding that the act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death but without any intention to cause death - The sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment was confirmed (Paras 1-10). B) Motor Vehicles Act - Drunk driving - Sections 181, 184, 185 MV Act - The accused was also convicted for driving without a license, rash driving, and driving under the influence of alcohol - The court upheld these convictions as the evidence clearly established the accused was drunk and drove negligently (Paras 2-3). C) Criminal Procedure - Confiscation of vehicle - Section 452 CrPC - The trial court ordered confiscation and auction of the vehicle used in the crime - The High Court set aside this order, holding that the vehicle belonged to the appellant (Hitendra Ukey) who was not the accused, and there was no provision for confiscation under the MV Act or IPC for such offences - The vehicle was directed to be returned to its owner (Paras 3, 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant-accused under Section 304 Part II IPC and other offences is sustainable; and whether the order of confiscation and auction of the vehicle was legal.
Final Decision
Criminal Appeal No.509/2013 filed by Deepak Gedam is dismissed, upholding his conviction and sentence. Criminal Appeal No.489/2012 filed by Hitendra Ukey is allowed, setting aside the order of confiscation and auction of the vehicle, directing that the vehicle be returned to its owner.
Law Points
- Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
- Rash and negligent driving
- Drunk driving
- Confiscation of vehicle
- Motor Vehicles Act
- Indian Penal Code
