AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 199 wordsR.L. Anand, J.
Notice to the State as well as to the complainant.
On the asking of the Court Shri J.S. Ahlawat, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the State and Shri Mohinder Singla, Advocate appears on behalf of the complainant.
The learned counsel for the complainant states that he has no objection if the present appeal is allowed as the complainant and injured witnesses have compounded the offence with the appellant/petitioner. Moreover, the parties are near relations and in the interest of the parties the Court may allow the compounding of the offence. The State has also no objection to the allowing of the appeal. Though the offences are not compoundable but invoking the inherent powers and keeping in view the fact that the parties are close relations; that the incident took place in the year 1987 and that since then no untoward incident has happened between the parties, the parties are allowed to enter into compromise. Resultantly the present appeal is hereby allowed, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence are hereby set aside and the appellants are hereby acquitted of the charged framed against them.
The main criminal appeal stands disposed of.