SABIR ANSARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 20-4-2007 by which learned Addl. Sessions Judge/ftc-1, Ghazipur in S. T. No. 23 of 1999 has rejected two applications. One application was with prayer to decide the case in terms of the compromise and second application was with a prayer that P. W. 1,2 and 3 may be recalled for re- cross-examination under Section 311 Cr. P. C. it is contended by learned Counsel for the applicants that both the parties have entered into compromise, they do not want to proceed further. Proceeding is trialable by Court of sessions i. e. under Section 304 IPC, in such circumstances, the witness will not support the prosecution story. The result of the case will be acquittal of the accused, therefore, the futile exercise should not be done, such view has been taken by the another Bench of this Court in the case of Yahiya Khan and Raziullah Khan v. State of U. P. , 2007 (1) JIC 126 (SC) : 2006 (56) ACC 853.

(2.) IN reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A. G. A. that the offence is not compoundable, therefore, no such direction may be issued for disposal of the case in terms of the compromise and no ground has been taken for recalling the witnesses P. W. 1,2 and 3 under Section 311 Cr. P. C. From the perusal of the record and the impugned order it appears that in the present case the application has been filed by the applicants so that case may be decided in terms of the compromise which have been filed by the parties concerned. IN the light of that compromise, the recall of the witnesses is necessary, so that they may be declared hostile, for the same purpose the application under Section 311 Cr. P. C. has been filed with a prayer to recall the P. W. 1,2 and 3. Both the applications have been rejected by the trial Court.