ORDER

KURIAN, J.

Review Petitioners seek modification mainly of the sentence awarded to the accused - Sushil Ansal and Gopal Ansal as per the Orders of this Court dated 19.08.2015 and 22.09.2015 in the Criminal Appeals. It is the main contention of Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Central Bureau of Investigation that there is no provision for substitution of sentence by fine. It is also the case of the Review Petitioners that the accused-1 and 2 deserve the maximum sentence under Section 304 A of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"). Having also heard Mr. Ashok H. Desai, Mr. Salman Khurshid, Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi, Mr. K. Radhakrishnan and Ms. Rebecca John, learned Senior Counsels appearing on both sides, we feel it necessary to refer to the background of the case as reflected in the various orders passed by this Court.

Section 304A,

2. In Sushil Ansal v. State Through Central Bureau of Investigation, (2014) 6 SCC 173 at paragraphs-27 and 28, this Court dealt with the conviction and sentence of the trial court:

"27. In conclusion and on the basis of the findings recorded by it, the trial court convicted Sushil Ansal (A-1) and Gopal