Arjun Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Heard on I.A. No.834/2019r, an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, for condonation of delay in filing this revision petition, which is barred by 641 days.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a poor agriculturist and he has filed Criminal revision No.165/2017 on 09/02/2017 within prescribed limitation period. But at the time of presenting the aforesaid revision petition, he was not in custody, so on 10/10/2017 the applicant has withdrawn the revision petition with liberty to file fresh revision after his surrendering before the trial Court. Later-on on 11/11/2018, the applicant was arrested and presented before the trial Court from where he has been sent to custody. After that the applicant has filed this revision petition, hence the delay. Therefore, counsel prayed for condonation of 641 days delay in preferring this petition.

Learned Public Prosecutor has no objection in the aforesaid prayer.

Looking to the reasons assigned in the application which is supported with an affidavit sufficient cause is made out for condonation of 641 days delay in preferring this revision petition.

Accordingly, I.A. No.834/2019 is allowed and the delay of 641 days in preferring this revision petition is hereby condoned.

Also heard on I.A. Nos.923/2019 and 924/2019 applications under Section 320(2) and 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity 'the Code') for compromise of the case.

Applicant has preferred this revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of 'the code' being aggrieved by the judgment dated 11/01/2017 passed in Cri. Appeal No.124/2015, by Additional Sessions Judge, Susner, District Shahjapur, whereby, the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Susner in Criminal case No.155/2011, vide order dated 13/02/2015 for offence punishable under Section 325/34 of IPC has been affirmed.

Prosecution story in brief, is that on 15/04/2011 when complainant-Nandram was constructing fencing boundary in between the land of the complainant and the main-accused-Narayansingh, at that time Narayansingh came there armed with wooden stick and started abusing the complainant. When complainant prevented him then he gave a latti blow on his head, hand and leg due to which he sustained injury. When his son Pavan and brother Bhagwansingh came to rescue him then the present applicant Arjun and Bhadur assaulted them. Complainant lodged a report at police station Soyatkala on the basis of which offence under Sections 323, 504, 506-II, 34 of IPC was registered at crime No.48/2011 against the present appellant and co-accused persons. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Susner, District- Shajapur.

The trial Court after framing of charges and recording the evidence, acquitted the main-accused Narayansingh and present applicant - Arjun Singh for offence under Section 323,504, 506-II of IPC, however, found them guilty for offence under Sections 325/34 of IPC and convicted and sentenced each of them for 1 year R.I with a fine of Rs.500/- and usual default stipulation. Co-accused persons Rodulal and Bahadur Singh were acquitted from the offences registered against them. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, applicant filed Cr.A. No.125/2015 before the Court of Sessions, which was dismissed by affirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, hence the present revision.

During the pendency of this revision petition, the complainant-Nandram and the applicant have jointly filed application bearing I.A. Nos.923/2019 and 924/2019 under Sections 320(2) and 320 of Cr.P.C stating that the dispute between the parties has been resolved and they have entered into compromise with no intention to pursue the matter further. In compliance of the order dated 01/02/2019 passed by this Court the factum of compromise has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court and he has submitted a report on 11/02/2019 that both the parties have arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion. The offence under Section 325 of IPC is compoundable and Nandram is the injured person, who has compounded the offence under Section 325 of IPC with the applicant/accused persons. Both the parties have settled their dispute and they wanted to live peacefully in future. Therefore, the aforesaid compromise is accepted and on virtue of this compromise, I.A. Nos. I.A. Nos.923/2019 and 924/2019 stands allowed.

Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the revision petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded by the appellate Court against applicant-Arjunsingh for offence under Section 325/34 of IPC is set aside and he has been acquitted from the charge.

The appellant is in jail, the Registry of this Court is directed to arrange for issuance of release warrant of appellant -Arjun Singh. A copy of the order be sent to the trial Court along with record for information and compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.