LAL CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence dated 29.1.1990, rendered by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirsa, vide which it convicted Lal Chand and Vakil Chand, accused (now appellants), for the offences, punishable under Sections 326 and 324 IPC, and sentenced Lal Chand, accused, to undergo RI for a period of three years, for the offence, punishable under Section 326 IPC, and sentenced Vakil Chand, accused, to undergo RI for a period of one year, for the offence, punishable under Section 324 IPC, for causing injuries on the person of Harmesh Lal @ Ramesh Kumar, Lekh Raj, and Karmo Bai.

(2.) DURING the pendency of appeal, the parties entered into a compromise, being closely related to each other, as Ram Kishan, author of the FIR, is the real brother of Lal Chand, appellant, and real uncle of Vakil Chand, appellant, who is the son of Lal Chand, and Ramesh Kumar, injured, is the real nephew of Lal Chand, appellant, and his mother Ram Piari, is the real sister of Lal Chand, whereas, Vakil Chand, is the cousin of Ramesh Kumar, injured. Vide compromise deed (Annexure A/1), it was stated by them, that the parties being nearly related to each other, have settled their dispute, and with a view to bring about better relations, between them, the compromise be accepted. The compromise (Annexure A/1), was also duly supported by the affidavits of Ram Kishan and Ramesh, (Annexure A/2) and (Annexure A/3) respectively. Thus, an application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for placing on record, the compromise, and acquitting the accused, was filed. In other words, vide application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the appellants sought quashing of the FIR, as also the conviction, and the order of sentence, recorded by the trial Court.

(3.) THE first question, that arises for consideration is, as to whether, the FIR, as also the judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence, could be quashed, in exercise of the power, under Section 482 Cr.P.C, or not. It was held in Abasaheb Yadav Honmane v. State of Crl. Appeal No.49-SB of 1990 3 Maharashtra 2008(3) All India Criminal Law Reporter 676, by a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court, that the power to compound, can be exercised at the trial stage, or even at the appellate stage. Similar principle of law was, laid down, in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab 2007(3) Law Herald 2225, by a Full Bench of this Court. Under these circumstances, relying upon the ratio of law, laid down, in the aforesaid authorities, the proceedings, can be quashed, at the appellate stage, including the FIR, as also the judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence, recorded by the trial Court, if the facts and circumstances, of a particular case, so warrant.