Shankhdhari Prajapati vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Shri Santosh Kumar Meshram, learned counsel for the complainant.

This revision has been filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, by the applicants against the judgment dated 26.07.2019,

passed by learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Nagod, District-Satna (MP), passed in Criminal Appeal No.40/2017 arising out of judgment and

conviction dated 09.12.2016 passed by JMFC Nagod in Criminal Case No.707/2015, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the applicants for

the offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years with a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default

stipulation and Section 323 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 06 months with a fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation

and the learned Sessions Judge has affirmed the judgment passed by the learned trial Court.

During pendency of this revision, complainant and injured, namely, Jhagdu and Rampyari have filed an application under Section 320(2) of Cr.P.C. for

permission to compromise in the matter. They have also filed an application under Section 320(1) of Cr.P.C. for grant of compromise.

It appears that both the parties have filed Compromise Petition under Section 320(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure and both the parties were

directed to appear before Registrar (J-II) for verification of the Compromise petition on 27.01.2020.

In compliance of order dated 27.01.2020, the parties have appears before the Registrar (J-II) for recording the statements of the parties. Registrar (J-

II) recorded the statements of parties and verified the compromise. The verification report has been received from Registrar (J-II) with report dated

10.02.2020 that parties have voluntarily entered into compromise and now their relations have become very cordial and they intend to maintain such

relation in future also. They have no grudge or complaint to each other and they want to end all the disputes and enmities between them. The

verification report is annexed with the statements of applicant and the complainant and injured duly signed by them.

It is revealed that offence under Sections 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC involved in the case, is compoundable offence under Section 320(1) of

Cr.P.C. without leave of the Court and Section 325 read with Section 34 of IPC involved in the case, is compoundable offences under Section 320(2)

of the Cr.P.C. with the leave of the Court. Since the conviction order has been passed and the accused/applicant has preferred this compromise

application after appellate stage, therefore, the same can be compoundable under Section 320(5) of Cr.P.C. Although, parties have not filed

application under Section 320(5) of Cr.P.C. but in the interest of justice, this Court proceed further on the oral request made by the counsel for the

parties.

In view of the fact that parties compromise is taken place between the parties and looking to the fact that parties have settled their dispute amicably

without any influence, fear and undue pressure and to see that they shall keep good terms in future, this Court is of the considered opinion that no

useful purpose is going to be served by keeping this matter pending especially when the grievance of complainant and injured have been satisfied by

the present applicant.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed and parties are permitted to make compromise in the case. Consequentially, the judgment of conviction and

sentence dated 26.07.2019, passed by learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Nagod, District-Satna (MP), in Criminal Appeal No.40/201, is hereby

quashed. The accused/applicant-Shankhdhari Prajapati is acquitted from the charge for offence punishable under Sections 323 read with Section 34

and 325 read with Section 34 of IPC. The fine amount if any, deposited by the applicants be returned to him.

The revision stands disposed off accordingly.