Judgment Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. 1. Mr. Baldev Kapoor appearing for the petitioner, at the outset has stated that since in the present case occurrence pertains to the year 1987 and petitioner has suffered protracted trial of 21 years, he will confine his arguments to reduction of the sentence. He has further sated that he has gone through the evidence and will not be in a position to dislodge the testimony of the witness, upon whom the two courts below have placed implicit reliance. He has further stated that he is conscious that the revisional Court will not be in a position to re-evaluate or reappreciate the evidence when findings of fact have been returned by the two Courts below. 2. This Court appreciate the fairness of Mr. Baldev Kapoor. 3. Furthermore, Gurmail Singh PW-2 eye witness is injured in the occurrence. Therefore, his presence is stamped. 4. Briefly stated, petitioner was nominated as accused in case FIRNo.33 dated 08.02.1987 registered at Police Station Gobindgarh for offences under Section 279/337/304-A IPC. It has been stated by Gurmail Singh PW-2 that he was married to Harjinder Kaur daughter of Ujagar Singh about one year and three months ago. He has got a child Sharanjit Singh aged about three months and on the day of occurrence, he was going to his in-laws house on motorcycle No. PJV-4911 along with his wife Harjinder Kaur and his son Sharanjit Singh. When he had gone about half kilometer to area of village Ajnali, near old octroi post, a bus No. PUN-2542 of Banda Bahadur Transport Company, Ludhiana came in a rash and negligent manner and struck against the motorcycle of Gurmail Singh PW-2. Head of Harjinder Kaur struck against the bus and she fell down on the ground and died at spot. As a result of accident, his son Sharanjit Singh also received injuries. On the day of occurrence, witness Darbara Singh Numberdar was present there. Darbara Singh also appeared as PW-3 against the petitioner. 5. The learned trial Court had awarded sentence of two years and a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months. Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, petitioner had filed an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala. 6. As stated earlier, counsel has confined his arguments to the reduction of sentence. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo six months. Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, petitioner had filed an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala. 6. As stated earlier, counsel has confined his arguments to the reduction of sentence. It has been stated before me that at the time of occurrence, petitioner was aged 28 years and now he is aged about 49 years. In the last 21 years, petitioner has committed no other offence. Petitioner was taken into custody on 12th December, 1992 when his appeal was dismissed. He was granted bail by this Court on 22nd March, 1993. He has undergone three months and ten days. 7. Taking into account antecedents of the petitioner and protracted trial of 21 years, ends of justice will be met in case the petitioner is not sent behind the bars. Accordingly, sentence of the petitioner is reduced to already undergone. However, to compensate the family of the deceased, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.35000/- and same shall be disbursed as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala shall call upon the petitioner to deposit the sentence of fine within three months after serving him a notice. 8. In case the sentenceof fine is not deposited present revision petition shall stand dismissed and no benefit will accrue to the petitioner, regarding reduction of sentence.