JUDGMENT 1. - By filing instant criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., the accused-petitioner has challenged the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 24.6.2003 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short "the appellate Court") in Criminal Appeal No. 32/2003 by which the appeal of the accused-petitioner was dismissed and against the judgment dated 14.2.2003 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short "the trial Court"), whereby the accused-petitioner was convicted for the offence under Sections 279 and 304-A I.P.C. 2. In this appeal learned counsel appearing on behalf of accused-petitioner has made a request to the Court that he is not challenging the conviction part of the judgments of Courts below but he is only requesting to the Court that the sentence of the accused-petitioner be reduced for the period already undergone. 3. He has further urged to this Court that in the instant case the alleged incident has taken place on 13.8.1989 i.e. approx. more than 20 years ago from today and the accused-petitioner has remained in judicial lock near-about 72 days. Lastly, he submits that the accused-petitioner is having his family and his children are in marriageable age. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as also in the interest of justice, I am inclined to take a lenient view in the matter and I think that it is not a fit case where the accused-petitioner be sent back to jail. 6. In the result, I maintain the order of conviction dated 24.6.2003 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Criminal Appeal No. 32/2003 by which he affirmed the judgment dated 14.2.2003 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur. But looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the accused-petitioner has remained in judicial lock up near about 72 days, the ends of justice would be met in sentencing him for the period already undergone by him in confinement. 7. The judgment dated 24.6.2003 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 32/2003 by which he affirmed the judgment dated 14.2.2003 passed by learned Addl. 7. The judgment dated 24.6.2003 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 4, Jaipur City, Jaipur, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 32/2003 by which he affirmed the judgment dated 14.2.2003 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur is modified to the extent as indicated above. The accused-petitioner is directed to deposit Rs. 25,000/- as a fine in the trial Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt a certified copy of this order. The learned trial Court shall disburse the aforesaid amount to the successor of the deceased thereafter.This criminal revision petition is partly allowed.Revision partly allowed. *******