AMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED -appellants Amar Singh, Bhagwan Das, Virendra Kumar and Ram Kumar were convicted of the offences punishable under Section 324 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 506(II) of IPC and were sentenced appropriately. Aggrieved against the impugned judgment and order dated 17.10.2003, present criminal appeal was preferred. A Compounding Application No. CRMA 841 of 2013 is filed on behalf of the injured Rampal, Tassabur Hussain, Abrar Hussain, Km. Rita and Afzal Ahmad for permitting them to compound the offences charges against the accused -appellants. The compounding application is duly supported by the affidavits of the injured persons.

(2.) THE injured persons are present in person before this Court, duly identified by their counsel Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate, who submitted that they are no interested in prosecution of the accused -appellants, in as much as they have reached an amicable settlement between them with the intervention of some elderly people.

(3.) HON 'ble Supreme Court of India in Transfer Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2012, Dimpey Gujral v. Union Territory through Administrator U.T. Chandigarh and others, [ : 2013 (123) AIC 119 (S.C.) permitted the injured to compound the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. The Hon'ble Apex Court relied upon the ruling of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160, relevant paragraph of which is being reproduced here -in -under for ready reference: