PARMAR JAYANTIBHAI KALIDAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appellants convict accused have filed this Appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st July 2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Sessions Case No.241/1998 in connection with the offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence under Section 427 of the Penal Code, the appellants-accused have been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.100=00 each and in default of paying the fine, to further suffer simple imprisonment for seven days. Short facts of the prosecution case are that a complaint was lodged with the Kalol Taluka Police Station against the present appellants-accused on 13.10.1997 by one Parshottambhai Bhagabhai Patel, resident of Dhamasana, Taluka Kalol, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. Pursuant to the registration of the complaint, investigation was made by the Investigating Officer of the Kalol Taluka Police Station and the charge-sheet along with the case papers were submitted to the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kalol, wherein the case was registered as Criminal Case No.2899/97 and as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was committed to the Sessions Court at Mehsana which was registered as Sessions Case No.241/1998. After hearing both the parties, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana has, by his judgment and order dated 31st July 2000 passed in Sessions Case No.241/1998, convicted the present appellants-accused for the offences punishable under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned advocate Mr.Thacker for the appellants-accused has submitted that the complainant and the appellants-accused are all neighbours and residents of the same village and they have amicably settled the matter between them out of the Court and they are ready and willing to compound the offence. Compromise purshis signed by both the parties and countersigned by the learned advocates for the parties have been produced before the Court. THE said compromise purshis are ordered to be taken on the record of the matter. In the cases of Mahesh Chand and another v/s. State of Rajasthan reported in AIR 1988 SC 2111; State of U.P. v/s. Fazilur Rehman reported in J.T. 2002(10) SC 137; Badrilal v/s. State of M.P. reported in 2005 SCC(Cri) 1597; Jetha Ram v/s. State of Rajasthan reported in 2006(9) SCC 255; Ishwar Singh v/s. State of M.P. reported in AIR 2009 SC 675 and Manoj and another v/s. State of M.P. reported in 2009(2) GLH 56, the Hon'ble Apex Court while taking into account the fact of compromise between the parties, has reduced the sentence imposed on the accused to already undergone though the offences were not compoundable. Thus, the compounding of offences is legal and valid. I have perused the compromise purshis signed by both the parties and their respective advocates. THE appellants are also present in the Court and they have contended that they voluntarily desire to compromise the matter. I have also perused the judgment of this Court (Coram: K.J.Vaidhya, J.) reported in GLR 1994(1) 415, wherein it has been stated that offences under the Atrocity Act can also be considered. I have gone through the compromise purshis filed by both the parties as well as the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and by this Hon'ble Court more particularly the judgment of the Division Bench (Coram: K.S.Jhaveri and Z.K.Saiyed, JJ.) in the case of Rajabhai Bhavanbhai Rabari v/s. State of Gujarat [2009(0) GLHEL-HC 222845]. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, both the parties are permitted to settle the matter by way of compromise and in view of the compromise made by both the parties, this Appeal is partly allowed. THE Judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st July 2000 passed in Sessions Case No.241 of 1998 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana is hereby modified to the extent that the order of sentence is quashed and set-aside. However, the order of payment of fine shall remain unaltered. THE appellants-accused are hereby acquitted. THE appellants-accused are on bail, therefore, bail bonds stand cancelled.