The Supreme Court of India has allowed a criminal appeal filed by a driver of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), commuting his six-month prison sentence to a fine of ₹5,00,000, which will be paid as compensation to the family of the deceased victim. While confirming the driver’s conviction under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA), a Division Bench of the Supreme Court directed his release after due admonition under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The Court further ruled that the conviction and fine will not result in any disqualification affecting his employment or service career with the BMTC.
Background of the Case
The appellant, Mahadevanna D.M., was employed as a driver with the Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC). On December 27, 2011, at approximately 7:15 p.m., while driving a BMTC bus bearing registration number KA-01-F-3716, the vehicle struck a pedestrian, Rangamma, who was crossing the road on foot. Rangamma sustained fatal injuries and subsequently succumbed to them at the hospital. The appellant did not report the accident to the police.
Following the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) and the subsequent investigation, a charge sheet was filed. On October 31, 2012, the Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 279 (rash driving) and 304-A (causing death by negligence) of the IPC, and Section 134(b) read with Section 187 of the MVA. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, which was dismissed on February 1, 2013, confirming the Trial Court’s judgment.
Thereafter, the appellant approached the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in a criminal revision. On March 3, 2022, the High Court partly allowed the revision by setting aside his conviction under Section 279 of the IPC. However, the High Court maintained the conviction under Section 304-A of the IPC and Sections 134(b) and 187 of the MVA, reaffirming the sentence directed by the Trial Court.
Aggrieved by the High Court’s order, the appellant filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court. On October 4, 2024, the Supreme Court issued notice, suspended the appellant’s sentence subject to the final outcome of the appeal, and directed the appellant to deposit ₹5,00,000 within eight weeks. The family members of the deceased were also joined as parties to the appeal. The directed amount was deposited by the appellant with the Registry and was kept in a fixed deposit.
Arguments of the Parties
During the final hearing of the matter on April 23, 2026, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant requested that the driver’s case be considered under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The counsel submitted that since the maximum sentence for an offence under Section 304-A of the IPC extends up to two years, the appellant is eligible to be released on probation under the Act.
The learned counsel representing the respondent, upon receiving instructions, submitted that they had no objection to the appellant’s prayer, provided that the ₹5,00,000 deposited by the appellant with the Registry is released to the family members of the deceased by way of compensation.
Court’s Analysis
The Division Bench, comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, evaluated the appellant’s eligibility under Section 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
The Court noted:
“Section 3 inter-alia deals with the power of the Court to release certain offenders after admonition if they are found guilty of having committed any offence with imprisonment of not more than two years.”
In analyzing the specific charges against the appellant, the Bench observed:
“The Appellant in the instant case has been convicted for offence under Section 304-A of IPC read with Section 134(b) and Section 187 of MVA. Neither of the charges has a prescribed punishment of more than 2 years, and hence, Appellant satisfies the pre-requisites of Section 3 of 1958 Act.”
Decision
The Supreme Court granted leave and disposed of the appeal. While confirming the conviction of the appellant, the Court directed that “instead of sentencing, the Appellant be released after due admonition.”
Addressing the appellant’s employment and service career, the Bench ruled that he is protected from employment disqualification under Section 12 of the 1958 Act:
“…since the Appellant has been extended the benefit under Sections 3 of the 1958 Act, he shall not incur any disqualification affecting his service career, if any, arising out of the conviction, in terms of Section 12 of the 1958 Act.”
Consequently, the Court commuted the original sentence—which consisted of six months of imprisonment under Section 304-A of the IPC alongside a fine of ₹3,000, and a fine of ₹500 for the charge under Section 134(b) read with Section 187 of the MVA—into a consolidated fine of ₹5,00,000. This entire commuted amount was directed to be paid towards compensation to the family of the deceased.
The Court explicitly directed:
“Since, the Appellant is in service of BMTC, therefore, the fine imposed be not treated as disqualification for employment, in view of benefit granted under Section 3 and 12 of 1958 Act to the Appellant.”
Finally, the Court directed the Registry to release the deposited amount along with any accrued interest to the family members of the deceased within four weeks of receiving their bank account details.
Case Details
- Case Title: Mahadevanna D.M. v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
- Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. of 2026 [Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 4563 of 2022]
- Bench: Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
- Date: May 18, 2026
