HARI PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHAGWAN Din, J. The present ap plicants Hari Pandey, Mannoo Gond, Shambhu Gond and Parmatma Nand filed a criminal revision under Section 397 Cr. P. C. assailing the order of conviction dated 12-2-1985 under Sections 147, 323, 149 and under Sections 324 and 1491. P. C. and sentencing them to six months R. I. under Section 147, three months R. I. under Sec tion 323 read with Section 1491. P. C. and six months R. I. under Section 324 read with Section 1491. P. C. The revision came up for hearing on 13-7- 1999. Sri G. P. Dikshit, learned Counsel appearing for revisionists did not dispute the conviction of the revisionists on merit. He however urged that a lenient view may be taken and the sentence awarded to the revisionists may be converted into sentence to fine.

(2.) THE revisionists, thereafter, through Sri N. K. Singh moved this ap plication for recalling the aforesaid order and praying for hearing and disposal of the revision on merit, having regard to the compromise entered into between the par ties. It is submitted that before the order dated 13-7-1999 was passed by this Court, the parties had filed a compromise in writ ing and that compromise was signed by the parties and verified by Sri N. K. Singh and Sri AN. Rai respectively. On the date this revision was listed for hearing the name of these two counsels were not shown in the cause list. THEre fore, they could not ap pear in the Court and bring the fact in the notice of the Court that the parties had entered into the compromise and the revision be disposed of in view of the com promise deed.