Back
Supreme Court Of India
D.M. DHARMADHIKARI AND B.N. SRIKRISHNA, JJ.
PRITAM SINGH- Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANAAND OTHERS - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 608 of 2005,
Decided on April 21, 2005
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 325 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 320 - Compounding of offence - Appellant convicted under Section 325 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years RI and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- Complainant died during pendency of appeal - One of sons of deceased complainant present in court -
The parties stated that in order to restore good relationship between them, they have compromised the matter.-They requested the Supreme Court for permission to compound the offence- Accepting the request the permission granted and accused acquitted. (paras 2 and 3)
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant stands convicted under Section 325 IPC and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10,000 by the impugned order of the High Court. During the pendency of the present appeal, the complainant (Gurnam Singh) is reported to be dead. One of the sons (Janak Raj) of the deceased complainant is present in this Court. The parties state that in order to restore good relationship between them, they have compromised the matter. They request this Court that the offence be permitted to be compounded.
3. On the joint request made, we find no ground to reject their prayer. Prayer for compounding the offence is allowed. The appellant is acquitted of the charge under Section 325 IPC. The appellant be set at liberty if not required in any other case.
4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
