TENNA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By impugned judgment and order dated 26.5.2007 of the trial court, the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 323/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo six months R.I.; each one of them has also been convicted for the offence under Section 308/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years and six months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-.

(2.) Compounding application (being CRMA No. 3501 of 2020) has been filed by the parties to indicate that they have buried their differences and have settled their disputes amicably. The compounding application is duly signed by convicts-appellant, injured as well as the complainant. Appellants Tenna, Dharmu and Parveen Kumar have also filed an affidavit indicating the same. So is the injured Jitender Pal Singh and the informant Sardar Sarabhjeet Singh, who have not only filed the affidavits, but are also present before the Court, duly identified by their respective counsel. The injured stated that he is not interested in prosecuting the appellants, inasmuch as, the dispute between them has been resolved amicably. Injured prayed for permitting him to compound the offences alleged and proved against present appellants. He also prayed that the appellants be exonerated of the charges levelled and proved against them.

(3.) Whereas the offences punishable under Sections 323 IPC is compoundable within the scheme of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. the offence under Section 308 IPC is not. The question is whether the injured should be permitted to compound such offence against the convicts/appellants or not?