The court modified the sentence for the accused to the period already undergone, considering the lengthy trial and the age of the accused, emphasizing justice over punishment.

ORDER :

BHUWAN GOYAL, J.

1. The present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed by the accused-petitioner- Kishor Kumar against Judgment and Order dated 24.01.2006 passed by Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "appellate court") in Criminal Appeal No. 11/2002 (Kishor Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan) vide which criminal appeal filed by the accused-petitioner against the Judgment and Order of Sentence dated 07.01.2002 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jaipur, District Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "trial court") convicting and sentencing him for the offences under sections 279 & 304-A I.P.C, was dismissed. The sentence awarded to the petitioner is as under:-

2. Facts of the case in short are that on the basis of the written report submitted by complainant – Balchand (P.W. 2) with respect to an incident, which occurred on 28.10.1982, wherein the allegation of driving the roadways bus rash & negligently resulting into death of a girl namely, Tulsi alias Narayani, was leveled, F.I.R. No. 224/82 was registered at Police Station Amer, District Jaipur for the offences under Sections 279 & 337 of I.P.C. During investigation, police added Section 304-A of I.P.C. After conclusion of investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against accused- petitioner for the 279 & 304-A of I.P.C. The trial court framed charges for the aforesaid offences and trial was commenced. After conclusion of trial, the trial court passed judgment and order of sentence dated 07.01.2002 convicting and sentencing him for the offences under Sections 279 & 304-A of I.P.C., as stated above. Aggrieved by judgment of conviction and sentence dated 07.01.2002, accused-petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which passed the Judgment & Order dated 24.01.2006 dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment of the trial court. Hence, this criminal revision petition has been preferred by the accused-petitioner.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. After arguing the matter on merits at some length, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner does not wish to press instant revision petition challenging judgments passed by the courts below qua conviction and prefers to make submissions on the point of sentence only.

5. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that incident in the present case took place way back in the year 1982 i.e. around 42 years ago; accused-petitioner was 26 years of age at the time of incident and now he is around 68 years old and facing agony of trial since last 42 years; accused-petitioner who is old person suffering from ailments, belongs to poor strata of society and remained in judicial custody for a period of 52 days and there is no previous conviction recorded against the accused- petitioner, therefore, he prays that ends of justice would meet if a lenient view is taken in the matter and sentence of imprisonment awarded to the accused-petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him.

6. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chander Shekhar vs. State of Rajasthan (Criminal Appeal No. 4161/2024) decided on 04.10.2024 and the judgments rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Shyamveer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 724/2003) decided on 15.05.2024, Smt. Sudesh Kumari vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1047/2005) decided on 09.10.2024, Mahesh Bhargava vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 737/2005) decided on 06.11.2024, Pappu vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 538/2005) decided on 21.08.2024, Annu @ Anwar vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B