LARUBATI Vs. KANAKLAL SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge of Darbhanga, under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code which, for the sake of brevity will be referred to hereinafter as 'the Code', for quashing the order of the 28th April 1961, of the earned Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani refusing to give effect to the compromise filed in the case by the parties and to acquit also Larubati, the petitioner who was one of the three accused standing trial before him.

(2.) THE facts are these: On the 22nd, of December, 1960, Kanaklal Sahu, the opposite party, filed a complaint against three persons, namely, Larubati, the petitioner; her husband Balat Mandar; and her husband's brother, Banelal Mandal, under sections 323, 324, 143 and 426 of the Indian Penal Code, in the Court of the Subdivisional Magistrate at Madhubani, on which cognisance was taken under Sections 323 and 324, Indian Penal Code, and the case was transferred, the same day, to the Judicial Magistrate of that place for disposal, who fixed 9 -2 -61 for appearance of the accused. On the same day, the petitioners husband's brother also filed a counter -complaint against the opposite party under Sections 379, 323 and 426, Indian Penal Code. We are, however, not concerned with the counter case, and, therefore, it is not necessary to say anything further about it.

(3.) IN the present case, started on the complaint of the opposite party, on 8 -2 -61, a day earlier, a joint petition of compromise was filed on behalf of the complainant and all the three accused, but it was signed only by the complainant and the two male accused, as the petitioner had not come to the Court that day. Along with the joint petition of compromise another petition for permission of the Court to compound the offence under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, was also filed. On 9th February, 1961, the said compromise was accepted and permission to compound the offence under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, between the complainant and the two male accused, was granted and they were acquitted under Section 345(6) of the Code.