Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1672 (PNJ)

Sukhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab

2003-12-16

NIRMAL SINGH

body2003
JUDGMENT Nirmal Singh, J. - This is a petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code for quashing FIR No. 163 dated 16.6.1986 under Sections 326, 324, 34 Indian Penal Code registered at police station Makhu registered on the statement of Sohan Singh-respondent No. 2. 2. After trial Sukhwinder Singh, Bagicha Singh, Sadhu Singh and Ajmer Kaur were convicted and sentenced by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Zira vide order dated 19.5.1993. The appellants filed appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur who set aside the conviction and remanded the case back to the lower Court to give fresh decision. After appreciating the evidence, the learned JMIC, Zira vide order dated 12.2.1998 sentenced the petitioner as under :- a) RI for one year and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for three months under Sections 326/34 Indian Penal Code. b) RI for six months under Section 324 Indian Penal Code. c) RI for four months under Section 323 Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. During the pendency of the appeal, the compromise has been effected. Compromise deed has been placed on record which is Annexure P-2. 4. Sohan Singh complainant and Jagir Singh injured are present in the Court. They have been identified by Shri Naresh Manchanda, Advocate. 5. Sohan Singh complainant made a statement that with the intervention of the respectables, he has settled the dispute with the accused and he does not want to pursue with the case. He requested that he may be allowed to compound the offence as the offence under Section 326 Indian Penal Code is non-compoundable. 6. The offence under Section 326 Indian Penal Code is non-compoundable but taking into consideration the circumstance of each case, the High Court exercising the powers under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code can allow the compounding of the offence in non-compoundable offences. 7. The FIR was registered in this case on 16.6.1986. More than 17 years have passed. After the occurrence the petitioner has not indulged in nay other criminal activity. Ajmer Kaur-accused had expired. The petitioner has suffered mentally and financially for 17 years, therefore, the parties are allowed to compound the offence subject to deposit of Rs. 7. The FIR was registered in this case on 16.6.1986. More than 17 years have passed. After the occurrence the petitioner has not indulged in nay other criminal activity. Ajmer Kaur-accused had expired. The petitioner has suffered mentally and financially for 17 years, therefore, the parties are allowed to compound the offence subject to deposit of Rs. 5,000/- within 15 days on receipt of copy of the order with the District Legal Services Authority, Ferozepur and the learned Additional Sessions will pass an appropriate order in appeal in view of the order that the parties have been allowed to compound the offence. Appeal allowed.