I am not able to understand why the Hon’ble Judge who found Alistair Pereira guilty of causing death by rash and negligent driving sentenced the boy to just six months imprisonment! The judge is probably a kindhearted gentleman of generous disposition but his intention has misfired. There has been a public outrage against the lenient sentence and I am happy that the high court has decided to intervene. The case has now been adjourned till June 6.The first thing the high court should do is to ascertain why the judge has not imposed the maximum sentence of two years. If he has found Alistair guilty of the charge, he should have taken into account the fact that seven poor labourers were killed and many others injured. When asked his opinion as to why the judge had pronounced such a lenient sentence, a former judge of the Bombay high court opined that the reasons could be many and refrained from hazarding a guess. I, for one, find the sentence amazing and unacceptable.A judge has to ensure that justice is done. If the prosecution has been lax and inefficient, as was obvious in this case, it was his duty to insist on the examination of the chemical analyser who was unfortunately turned away by the prosecutor for reasons best known to her. The analyser’s findings of alcohol in the blood of the accused would have clinched the case of drunken driving. It is pertinent to note that one need not be drunk to cause death by rash and negligent driving and there is no difference made by the law to the punishment to be imposed in such cases. It all depends on the circumstances and in this case the circumstances were so obvious that the judge should have had no compunction in awarding the maximum penalty that the law provided.As regards the public prosecutors, they are no longer answerable to the police chiefs as they were twenty years ago. The result has been quite disastrous in terms of conviction figures, interest taken in successful prosecution and, above all, in the quantum of corruption because of the opportunity it affords to the police and the prosecutor to shift blame to each other. The judge has castigated the investigating officers for flaws in the investigation. Considering the fall in standards of supervision and the fall in motivational levels all round, it is not surprising that the investigation has not been up to the mark in this case also. In fact, it is easy to point out flaws in most investigations by the police as they are loath to devote time to detail. In the final analysis, all arms of the judicial process system are culpable and I am sure that the high court will be sufficiently shocked to see how justice is being dispensed in a most uncaring and cursory manner.In a knee-jerk reaction to the public rage, the police have defensively stated that they are going to appeal and will even press for a murder charge against the accused! The police should know that the act does not amount to murder but could be stretched to bring it within section 304 of the IPC, which describes culpable homicide not amounting to murder. In the past, the police have never applied this section of the law for death caused by rash and negligent driving because of the specific provision contained in section 304A of the IPC. But after Salman Khan’s case the culpable homicide charge was added in order to assuage public anger. The public has cause to resent the attitudes and arrogance of the children of the rich, a few belonging to the old money class, but mainly the nouveau riche. There is a clear indication that the ‘get rich quick’ crowd has children who no longer care for anything else but their own enjoyment. If their irresponsibility has to be curbed, the law has to include a provision to make the parents also responsible. If it can be proved that parents have been culpably negligent then there should be provisions to punish them also, not necessarily by jailing or fining them but certainly by sentencing them to a term of compulsory counseling along with their wayward children.And as regards the children themselves, I feel that the law should provide for compulsory social work with the poor and the dispossessed so that they are sensitised to poverty and deprivation. For example, if Alistair was made to work for a year at least in the slums or with pavement dwellers like many social workers are doing voluntarily, it might make him into a much better human being, responsible, caring and compassionate.And finally, the police should sit and ponder on their own role and responsibilities in enforcing the law of the land. In Romania, where I lived for four years, whenever we invited couples home for dinner, only one of the pair would drink so that one totally sober person could drive back home. In Europe people respect the laws, and those who disregard regulations are not spared. Our traffic police needs to be more proactive in checking drivers, particularly after midnight, so that preventive measures are in place to ensure that irresponsible citizens do not turn into public menace.
