Patna High CourtCR. REV./986/2016disposed

Dadan Tiwary v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-02-21Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.986 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Dadan Tiwary Son of Late Dharmdeo Tiwary, Resident of VillageKumhau, Police Station- Sheo Sagar, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ram Awadesh Pandey, Son of Late Jai Narayan Pandey, Resident of Village- Kirhindi, P.S.- Sheo Sagar, District- Rohtas. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Choubey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Sufiyan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-02-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. The petitioner stood convicted by the judgment and order, dated 10.12.2012, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sasaram, in Complaint Case No. 738 of 2000, of the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of three years and a fine of Rs. 3,000/-. The said judgment and order of the learned Trial Court came to be upheld by the judgment and order, dated 18.06.2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Rohtas at Sasaram, in Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2013.

The present criminal revision application has been filed against the aforesaid decision of the Courts

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.986 of 2016 (5) dt.21-02-2017 2/3 below.

It appears that during the pendency of the present application, the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2, who is the complainant, have arrived at a compromise. Accordingly, a joint compromise petition has been filed on their behalf through I. A. No. 346 of 2017 with a prayer for compounding of the offence. Learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties have, in one voice, submitted that they have resolved their disputes and amicable relationship has, now, been restored between them.

The joint compromise petition filed on behalf of the parties appears to be bona fide.

Considering the above, this application is disposed of in terms of the said joint compromise petition. The offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, of which the petitioner has been convicted, stands compounded accordingly which shall have the effect of his acquittal.

This application stands disposed of.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.986 of 2016 (5) dt.21-02-2017 3/3