KAMAL PRAKASH KHURANA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant case, the Magistrate has taken cognizance on a complaint under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 and 324 of the INdian Penal Code. Except the offences alleged to have been committed under Section 452 of the INdian Penal Code, all the remaining offences are compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The persons entitled to compromise those compoundable offences are before me and have produced a memorandum of compromise.

(2.) AN offence committed under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be compounded. However, from a reading of the complaint, it does not appear that there was an allegation that the accused persons committed trespass, having made preparation for causing hurt to the complainant or any other person or for assaulting any person or for wrongfully restraining any person or for putting any person in fear of hurt or of assault or of wrongful restraint. On the other hand, the allegation in the complaint is trespass for the purpose of asking the complainant to vacate the house in question. Although there is an allegation that when the complainant refused to vacate the house in question, the accused persons meted out threat, but the action of trespass on the basis of the allegation contained in the complaint cannot be associated with such kind of trespass as mentioned in Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code. The same tantamounts to an allegation of house trespass mentioned in Section 451 of the Indian Penal Code and, accordingly, the cognizance should be read as such which, under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, may be compounded with the permission of the Court.