Pehtu @ Ramsharan Doman Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No. 630 of 2007 Pehtu @ Ramsharan Doman Yadav, Aged about 53 years, Agricultrist and Resident of village Piprol, Police Station Ramanujganj, District Surguja (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

The State of Chhattisgarh, through District Magistrate Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) ---- Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. Hemant K Patel, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor Order on Board on 23.01.2019 1.

This revision is directed against the judgment dated 21.11.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), in Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2007, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.05.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ramanujganj in Criminal Case No. 57/2002, convicting and sentencing the accused/applicant under Sections 354 IPC and sentencing him to undergo RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs. 250/- plus default stipulation.

2.

During the pendency of this revision petition, the applicant and the respondent are stated to have filed a joint application I. A. No. 02/2019 under Section 320 CrPC for compounding the offence. The said application is duly supported by their affidavits in which it is stated that they have amicably settled their dispute out side the Court. Such a statement has been made by them before Additional

Registrar (Judicial) also. Since the offence alleged is compoundable in the nature, this Court finds nothing to deviate from the statement made by the parties for compromise to be arrived at between them.

3.

Thus, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the statement of the parties made before this Court and thereafter before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) and keeping in view of the judgment passed in AIR 2010 SC 276 (K.M. Inbrahim v. K.P. Mohammed), as the parties have amicably settled their dispute in terms of section 147 of the Act, the application No. 02 of 2019 for compounding the offence is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence. Effect of this compromise would be the acquittal of the applicant of the charge under Section 354 IPC. 4.

Revision is thus allowed and the order dated 21.11.2007 is set aside.

Sd/- (Vimla Singh Kapoor) JUDGE Santosh