SUDHIR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both these appeals arise out of the same judgment and order, therefore, they are being decided together by this common Judgment for the sake of brevity and convenience.

(2.) Accused-appellant Sudhir, was convicted under Sections 308, 323/34, 325 and 506 of IPC. He was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and six months along with a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 for the offence under Sec. 308 Penal Code ; rigorous imprisonment for 1 year along with a fine of Rs. 500.00 for the offence under Sec. 325 Penal Code ; simple imprisonment for six months along with a fine of Rs. 250.00 for the offence under Sec. 323/34 Penal Code and simple imprisonment for three months along with a fine of Rs. 500.00 for the offence under Sec. 506 of IPC. Likewise, appellants Subhash and Shrawan @ Pintu were convicted under Sections 323/24 and 506 of Penal Code and were sentenced accordingly vide judgment and order dated 16.07.2015 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, Haridwar. Aggrieved against the same, present Criminal Appeals were filed on behalf of the appellants.

(3.) Compounding applications (being CRMA No. 458 of 2016 and CRMA No. 460 of 2016) have been filed by the parties to indicate that they have buried their differences and have settled their disputes amicably. The compounding applications are supported by the joint compromise, duly signed by Sudhir, Subhash and Shrawan @ Pintu (accused-appellants) and Smt. Kaushalya (injured). Appellants have also filed an affidavit indicating the same. So is Smt. Kaushalya (injured) and Sushil Kumar (informant), who have not only filed the affidavit, but are also present before the Court, duly identified by their counsel Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate. The injured Smt. Kaushalya says that she is not interested in prosecuting the appellants, inasmuch as, the dispute between them has been resolved amicably. Smt. Kaushalya prays for permitting her to compound the offences alleged and proved against Suhdir, Subhash and Shrawan @ Pintu (present appellants). She also says that the appellants be exonerated of the charges levelled and proved against them.