P. P. GUPTA,J, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a Criminal Appeal filed by the accused-appellant, Fazalur Rahman, against the judgment and order dated 21-4-1979 passed by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Saharanpur in Sessions Trial No. 35 of 1978, convicting the appellant under Section 307, I. P. C. and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for five years. ( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that in the morning of 27-6-1977 Afzal Ahmad (P. W. 1) accompanied by his brother, Mohd. Tariq (P. W. 2) left his house in order to purchase sugar etc. from the Ration Depot. Mohd. Tariq was to be married on 28-6-1977. They had to pass through Nakhasa Bazar. At about 10-00 AM. they reached in front of the shop called Veenus Chappals when the accused, Fazlur Rahman, came from the opposite direction. Sometime ago, Fazlur Rahman had contracted an oral debt of Rs. 1000/- from Mohd. Tariq. On seeing Fazalur Rahman there Mohd. Tariq demanded repayment of the said loan. This enraged Fazalur Rahman and he whipped out a knife from his pocket, saying that wherever he met Mohd. Tariq, the latter demanded repayment and that he would clear all accounts. Fazalur Rahman stabbed the knife in the abdomen of Mohd. Tariq. He gave two more knife blows to him, one of which hit in the abdomen and the other was taken by Mohd. Tariq on his hand. Mohd. Tariq started collapsing when he was forthwith supported by his brother, Afzal Ahmad (P. W. 1 ). Meanwhile, the accused, Fazalur Rahman, ran away from there saying that even if Mohd. Tariq survived, he would make full accounts later on. This occurrence was allegedly seen by Afzal Ahmad, Sagir, Jagdish and other persons, who had collected on the spot. ( 3 ) MOHD. Tariq was then shifted in a rickshaw by Afzal Ahmad (P. W. 1) to the S. B. D. Hospital, Saharanpur. After medical examination Mohd. Tariq was admitted in the hospital. ( 4 ) AFZAL Ahmad (P. W. 1) dictated the F. I. R. of the occurrence to Islam, who carried this F. I. R. along with a copy of the injury report of Mohd. Tariq to police station Kotwali and handed over the same at 11-30 A. M. on the same day. Tariq was admitted in the hospital. ( 4 ) AFZAL Ahmad (P. W. 1) dictated the F. I. R. of the occurrence to Islam, who carried this F. I. R. along with a copy of the injury report of Mohd. Tariq to police station Kotwali and handed over the same at 11-30 A. M. on the same day. The case was investigated by S. I. G. P. Singh, who submitted a charge-sheet against the accused on 29-8-1977. ( 5 ) THE accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be acquitted. ( 6 ) IN support of his case the prosecution examined seven witnesses. One Jahangir (D. W. 1) was also examined as a defence witness. ( 7 ) ON an assessment of the entire evidence, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty of the offence under section 307, I. P. C. and convicted and sentenced him as above. ( 8 ) FEELING aggrieved from the aforesaid order, the accused, appellant has come up in appeal before this Court. ( 9 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant, Sri. R. K. Jam, and the learned AG. A were heard and the record of the case was perused. ( 10 ) IT was submitted on behalf of the appellant that the parties have come on an amicable settlement and so the appellant should be acquitted under Section 320 (8), Cr. P. C. In reply thereto, the learned A. G. A. submitted that since the offence under Section 307, I. P. C. is not compoundable even with the permission of the Court, the appellant cannot be acquitted in view of the previsions of Section 320 (8), Cr. P. C. ( 11 ) I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties Admittedly, the offence under Section 307, I. P. C. is not compoundable even with the permission of the Court and so the prayer made on behalf of the appellant that the appellant may be acquitted under Section 320 (8), Cr. P. C. cannot be conceded. P. C. cannot be conceded. ( 12 ) HOWEVER, in view of the fact that the parties have entered into a written compromise, which has been verified by them before C. J. M. , Saharanpur, on 24-4-1991, and looking to the chastened attitude of the accused appellant, Fazalur Rahman and the commendable attitude of the injured- complainant, and also in order to restore harmony not only between the parties but also in the society, the ends of justice will be met if while maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Section 307, I. P. C. the sentence awarded is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone. ( 13 ) IN view of the above discussions the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant under Section 307, I. P. C. is maintained. However, the sentence of R. I. of five years, as awarded by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone. ( 14 ) THE accused-appellant, Fazalur Rahman, who is on bail, need not surrender. His bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged. Appeal partly allowed .