SHYAM Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 4.8.1989 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 1988, whereby he dismissed the appeal affirming the conviction of the applicant under section 456 IPC and sentence of R.I. for six months and fine of Rs. 100/ - in default S.I. for further one month.

(2.) THE applicant was charge -sheeted by the Sagar Police Cantt. for the offence under section 456 I.P.C. It was alleged against him that in the night of 25th July, 1988 the applicant committed lurking house tress pass by night climbing upon the first floor of the house of the prosecutrix Hirabai where she was sleeping and knocked the door. The complainant Hirabai did not open the door and asked the applicant to go away otherwise she would raise alarm.

(3.) SHRI Arun Kochar, learned counsel for the applicant, has contended that the parties have compromised the offence outside the Court and compromised petition has been filed duly signed by the Panchas on 14.11.1991 for permission to compound the offence. He further contended that no -doubt the offence under section 456 I.P.C. is not compoundable but considering the young age of the applicant, it is desirable in the interest of justice that the permission may be accorded to compound the offence. Reliance was also placed in Mahesh Chandra and another v. State of Rajasthan (AIR 1988 SC 2111) wherein permission to compound the offence under section 307 I.P.C. was granted by the Apex Court.