MADAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in S.T. No. 65/2013 on 24.10.2013, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 419 of IPC and sentenced to undergo two years RI, further convicted under Section 420 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three years RI with fine of Rs.100/ - and further convicted under Section 467 of IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years of RI with fine of Rs. 100/ - and further convicted under Section 468 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three years RI with fine of RS. 100/ -. In default of payment of fine, three months' additional imprisonment on each count has been recorded.

(2.) PROSECUTION case in brief is that, the agriculture land bearing survey Nos. 274, 275, 276, 277 and 278 situated at village Charat Rehat, Pargana District Gwalior recorded in the names of Santoli, Ramhet, Parmal, Kedar Singh. The appellants, Madan @ Mardana, Raghuvar and Betal and another person Piyush Vyas represented as persons for Santoli Ramhet, Parmal, Kedar Singh and prepared their forged identity cards and forged sale deeds in the office of the Registrar and received Rs.16,69,000/ - and 2% brokerage from the complaint. After enquiry the Crime No. 131/2012 has been registered and after due investigation the charge sheet was filed against the appellants. The case was committed for trial to the Sessions Court, which was transferred for trial to 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior. Charges were framed and after recording the evidence the appellants were convicted and sentenced as mentioned hereinabove. Feeling aggrieved this appeal has been preferred by the appellants.

(3.) DURING the pendency of this appeal the appellants and complainant settled their dispute and filed an application under Section 320 (2) of Cr.P.C, which has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court. As per the report of the Principal Registrar the compromise has been arrived at voluntarily without any fear and force. The offence under Section 419 and 420 of the IPC are compoundable with the permission of the Court hence permission is granted to the exstent. However, the offence under Section 467 and 468 of IPC are not compoundable.