Read Order: Kamal v. Sunil Kumar 

Tulip Kanth

Chandigarh, November 26, 2021: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stated that once, the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and respondent has already stated before this Court that his claim has been satisfied to his satisfaction and no objection has been raised to the prayer of the petitioner for compounding the offence, it is a fit case, where this Court needs to exercise the jurisdiction of compounding of offence.

The petitioner had filed this petition for compounding the offence for which petitioner had been convicted.

In the present criminal revision petition, the challenge was made to the order dated September 5,2016 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Abohar, by which, the petitioner was convicted for violating the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year along with fine of Rs. 1,000 and also to order dated November 10,2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka, by which, the appeal of the petitioner against the order of conviction was dismissed.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that during the pendency of the present criminal revision petition, the parties had entered into a compromise and the petitioner had already discharged his liability to the entire satisfaction of the respondent/complainant and, therefore, the conviction of petitioner ordered by the Court below may kindly be reconsidered, keeping in view the facts and circumstances that exists as of now. The counsel for the petitioner prayed that his prayer for compounding the offence may kindly be accepted.

The counsel for the respondent submitted that as per his instructions from the respondent, the claim of the respondent/complainant had been satisfied to his satisfaction.The counsel also submitted that that he had no objection, in case, the offence, for which, the petitioner had been charged and convicted, is compounded.

The Bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi observed that as per Sec.320(6) of the Cr.P.C, the High Court or the Court of Sessions, as the case may be, even while exercising the powers of revision as envisaged under Section 401 of Cr.P.C can compound the offence.

In the present case, it was not disputed by the respondent that the offence, for which, the petitioner has been charged and convicted is compoundable. Once, the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and respondent had already stated before this Court that his claim had been satisfied to his satisfaction and the Counsel appearing for the respondent raised no objection to the prayer of the petitioner for compounding the offence, it is a fit case, where this Court needs to exercise the jurisdiction of compounding of offence, added the Bench.

Accordingly, the present revision petition was accepted and the offence, for which, the petitioner was charged, was compounded and the judgment dated September 5,2016 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Abohar and judgment dated November 10,2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka were set aside and the accused was thus,ordered to be acquitted, subject to payment of cost of Rs.15,000 to be deposited with Prabh Aasra, an unit of Universal Disabled Care Taker Social Welfare Society, who have been maintaining Orphans.

0 CommentsClose Comments

Leave a comment