IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1770 of 2010 BINOD CHAUPAL, SON OF LATE RAM PRASAD CHAUPAL, R/O- VILLAGE- SIMA TOLE JITWARPUR, P.S.- RAHIKA, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR 2 16.12.2010 Rule confined to question of sentence only. Learned APP waives notice on behalf of the State. Heard. With the consent of parties, the application is being disposed of at the admission stage itself. The sole petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 6.9.2010 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge- cum-F.T.C.-III, Madhubani in Cr. Appeal No. 23 of 2004/35 of 2008 whereby on a consideration of the materials on record, the appeal preferred by the appellant herein was dismissed. For an occurrence that had taken place on 17.1.1996, the petitioner was tried by learned Trial Court in Tr. No. 1586 of 2004 for a charge punishable under Sections 279 and 304A IPC. As many as six (06) witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution to prove the charge(s). On a consideration of the materials on record, the petitioner was found and held guilty under Sections 279 and 304A IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 06 months with fine having default clause and rigorous imprisonment for 02 years with fine having default clause respectively. Aggrieved over the said judgment and order of conviction, the petitioner preferred the aforesaid appeal which was dismissed. - 2 - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the prosecution, the tractor was carrying a trailor loaded with Sugarcane. Allegation is that the trailor turned turtle as a result whereof, the minor son of the informant as well as his full brother (P.W. 4) along with another pedestrian came under the heap of Sugarcane and one of them (minor son of the informant) died instantaneously whereas two other injureds subsequently succumbed to the injuries. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the Trial Court’s judgment, it would appear that this was the first offence committed by the petitioner who was found driving the tractor. It is next submitted that the petitioner is the sole bread earner of his family and his continuance in the custody will be a suffering not only to him but to each and every member of the family who is dependent on him. It is next contended that the petitioner had to undergo the ordeal/rigours of trial for about eight (08) years and thereby had to undergo several excruciating circumstances which definitely tell upon the mental, physical and economical condition of the petitioner. These factors need to be kept in focus while inflicting sentence for the proven charge(s). Learned APP, on the other hand, submits that there is concurrent finding of guilt referred to by the two Courts below based on appraisal of the evidence produced by the parties which cannot be said to be perverse and/or patently illegal - 3 - meriting interference on merit. Trial Court’s judgment definitely indicates that the petitioner was the first offender. It further appears that a submission was advanced before the Trial Court itself that the petitioner is the sole bread earner of his family and hence a lenient view is required to be taken in this case. It further appears that the petitioner had to fight the criminal litigation/trial for about eight (08) years. Fighting criminal litigation for a long time and thereby to undergo ordeals of trial is a shadow of punishment which has to be kept in focus. At the time of conviction, he was found aged about 38 years. It is the submissions of the petitioner that he is now aged about 46 years and is well tethered to the family. Having regard to these facts appearing from record, this Court is satisfied that a lenient view, insofar as quantum of sentence is concerned, shall meet the ends of justice. Resultantly, while upholding the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the Trial Court and approved by the learned lower appellate Court, conviction recorded under Section 304A is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one (01) year. Other part(s)/condition(s) of the sentence shall remain intact. The application is dismissed with the aforesaid modification in sentence. pkj (Kishore K. Mandal, J)