Crl. Rev. No. 1702 of 2013 (OM) . -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA
Crl. Rev. No. 1702 of 2013 (OM)
Date of decision : 04.10.2018
Dalbir and another …… Petitioners
State of Haryana Anr. … Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANITA CHAUDHRY
Present: Mr. Narinder Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. J.S. Hooda, Advocate
for the appellant-respondent no.2.
ANITA CHAUDHRY , J.
The trial of the petitioners in case FIR No. 212 dated
23.07.2007, registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 323, 34 IPC,
Police Station Sadar Palwal, District Palwal culminated in their acquittal
by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Palwal.
Aggrieved with the order complainant-respondent no.2 filed
an appeal, which was allowed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Palwal on
26.03.2013. The judgment dated 13.01.2012 was set aside and the
petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period
of 02 years along with fine of Rs.2,000/- each for commission of offence
under Section 498-A IPC. In default of payment of fine they were to
further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 month. They
were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
1 of 3
07-10-2018 18:22:04 :::
Crl. Rev. No. 1702 of 2013 (OM) . -2-
01 year for commission of offence under Section 406 IPC. Both the
sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Aggrieved with the order of conviction, the petitioners have
preferred the instant revision petition. During the pendency thereof, it is
claimed that the parties have entered into compromise with the intervention
of respectable persons.
Report has been called from the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Mansa, after statements of the parties were recorded regarding the
compromise. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palwal has reported that the
compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. He has also
sent the statements of parties along with the report.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that now good
sense has prevailed and parties have decided to settle the dispute by entering
into a compromise and petitioner no.1 and complainant have decided to
reside together and have withdrawn all the cases. Affidavit of the
complainant, reiterating the factum of compromise has been placed on
record. Counsel further urges that all the parties have also appeared before
the CJM, Palwal and have affirmed the compromise. It is prayed that in
view of the compromise, the petitioners may be acquitted.
Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-applicant states
that the complainant has no objection if the petitioners are acquitted.
In view of the above, the application (CRM-6793-2018) is
allowed and the main revision is taken up on Board today itself.
2 of 3
07-10-2018 18:22:05 :::
Crl. Rev. No. 1702 of 2013 (OM) . -3-
In the instant case, better sense has prevailed to the parties and
they have put an end to their grievance and have settled the dispute with
their free will without any pressure or coercion.
Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute, there is no
legal impediment in granting permission to them to compound the offence.
In view of the statements and report of the CJM, Mansa and the principles
laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh
and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal)
1052, approved by Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab
and others (2013) 10 SCC 303, the instant revision petition is allowed.
Consequently, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Court
below is set aside and the petitioners are acquitted of the charges.
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
07-10-2018 18:22:05 :::