Yadu Nandan Mandal and anr. Vs. State of Bihar - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- motor vehicles act (59 of 1988)section 168: [dr.arijit pasayat & asok kumar ganguly,jj] compensation - multiplier method held, it involves ascertainment of loss of dependency or multiplicand. choice of multiplier is determined by age of deceased and by calculation as to what capital sum would yield the multiplicand by way of annual interest. section 168: [dr.arijit pasayat & asok kumar ganguly,jj] compensation determination - deceased riding scooter died in accident with bus - he was aged 43 years and earning rs. 12000/-p.m. as contractor applying multiplier of 10 and making 1/3rd deduction claimants would be entitled to compensation of rs.2,40,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. section 168 :[dr.arijit pasayat & asok kumar ganguly,jj] compensation multiplier method held, the multiplier method involves the ascertainment of the loss of dependency or the multiplicand having regard to the circumstances of the case and capitalising the multiplicand by an appropriate multiplier. the choice of the multiplier is determined by the age of the deceased (or that of the claimants whichever is higher) and by the calculation as to what capital sum, if invested at a rate of interest appropriate to a stable economy, would yield the multiplicand by way of annual interest. in ascertaining this, regard should also be had to the fact that ultimately the capital sum should also be consumed up over the period for which the dependency is expected to last. deceased aged 43 years at time of accident and was hawker. multiplier of 10 and rate of interest @ 6% p.a. would be appropriate and not multiplier of 15 and interest rate @ 9% p.a. fixed by high court. compensation was determined at rs.2,00,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. order1. appellants, yadu nandan mandal and diwakar mandal were tried along with ganesh mandal and shyamdeo jha for offences under sections 364/34, 302/34, 201/34 and 379/34 of indian penal code (for short `ipc') on the allegations of having abducted and murdered gauri kant jha and aditya nath jha, disposed of their dead bodies and committed theft of their bicycles. the trial court acquitted shyamdeo jha but convicted the remaining persons under section 364 read with section 34 ipc and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life. however, all the accused were acquitted of the charges under sections 304/35, 201/34 and 379/34 ipc. all the convicts preferred appeal against the judgment of the trial court. during the pendency of the appeal, accused, ganesh mandal died and, on that account, appeal filed by him abated. so far as the remaining two appellants are concerned, the high court confirmed their conviction and sentence. hence, this appeal by special leave.2. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has pressed this appeal on the question of sentence and made a prayer that the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellants be reduced to the period already undergone as appellant no. 1 - yadu nandan mandal has remained in custody for a period of more than five years and appellant no. 2 - diwakar mandal has remained in custody for a period of more than seven years.3. having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met in case the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone.4. accordingly, the appeal is allowed in-part and while upholding the conviction of the appellants, the sentence of imprisonment awarded against them is reduced to the period already undergone.5. the appellants, who are on bail, are discharged from the liability of bail bonds.

Judgment:
ORDER

1. Appellants, Yadu Nandan Mandal and Diwakar Mandal were tried along with Ganesh Mandal and Shyamdeo Jha for offences under Sections 364/34, 302/34, 201/34 and 379/34 of Indian Penal Code (for short `IPC') on the allegations of having abducted and murdered Gauri Kant Jha and Aditya Nath Jha, disposed of their dead bodies and committed theft of their bicycles. The trial Court acquitted Shyamdeo Jha but convicted the remaining persons under Section 364 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life. However, all the accused were acquitted of the charges under Sections 304/35, 201/34 and 379/34 IPC. All the convicts preferred appeal against the judgment of the trial Court. During the pendency of the appeal, accused, Ganesh Mandal died and, on that account, appeal filed by him abated. So far as the remaining two appellants are concerned, the High Court confirmed their conviction and sentence. Hence, this appeal by special leave.

2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has pressed this appeal on the question of sentence and made a prayer that the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellants be reduced to the period already undergone as appellant No. 1 - Yadu Nandan Mandal has remained in custody for a period of more than five years and appellant No. 2 - Diwakar Mandal has remained in custody for a period of more than seven years.

3. Having heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met in case the sentence of imprisonment awarded against the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone.

4. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in-part and while upholding the conviction of the appellants, the sentence of imprisonment awarded against them is reduced to the period already undergone.

5. The appellants, who are on bail, are discharged from the liability of bail bonds.