Harvinder Singh And ORS. v. State Of Punjaband ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRR No.3706 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision: February 21, 2015 Harvinder Singh and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.K.S.Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.S.S.Chandumajra, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr.Jasmeet Ghumman, Advocate for respondent No.2.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioners Harvinder Singh son of Mohinder Singh, Jasdeep Kaur @ Pinki and Paramjit Singh have filed this revision petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C. against State of Punjab and Harvinder Singh son of Swaran Singh respondents challenging the judgment dated 31.10.2014 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar.

It is mainly stated in the grounds of revision that the judgment dated 31.10.2014 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar is against the law, facts and evidence on record. Learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the petitioners beyond the shadow of VINEET GULATI 2015.02.27 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRR No.3706 of 2014 -2doubt as the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and subsequently, learned appellate Court has erred in convicting the petitioners for one year without appreciating the facts, law and evidence on record.

Notice of motion was issued in this case and learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 appeared. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. During the pendency of the revision petition, the parties have effected compromise, copy of which is placed on the record. An application i.e. CRM No.2970 of 2015 has also been filed for compounding of the offences. Keeping in view the compromise between the parties, which fact is admitted by learned counsel for respondent No.2 at the time of arguments and the fact that the offences are compoundable, therefore, this CRM No.2970 of 2015 is allowed and the parties are allowed to compound the offences. Keeping in view the lawful composition of the offences, the present revision petition is accepted. The offences are compounded and revision petitioners are acquitted of the charges framed against them.

As the revision petitioners are already on bail, therefore, their bail bonds stand discharged.

February 21, 2015 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE VINEET GULATI 2015.02.27 16:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh