The court may consider amicable settlements in non-compoundable offences for sentencing, reducing the sentence based on the absence of further disputes and the passage of time.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.

1. All these three Criminal Appeals arising from one judgment and order dated 15.09.2009 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as the "trial Court") rendered in Sessions Case No. 37 of 2009 whereby the accused persons were convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 436 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC" for short) and ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment ("RI" for short) for two years and also imposed a fine of Rs.500/- each and in default RI for two months. So far as the offence under Section 326, 337, 323, 504 r/w Section 114 of IPC is concerned, all the accused persons were acquitted. Against which, the State has preferred an Acquittal Appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 2414 2009 as well as Enhancement Appeal being Criminal Appeal No 2413 of 2009 and the accused persons have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1789 of 2009 whereby the State and accused persons have challenged the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by trial Court.

2. The Appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 2413 of 2009 came to be admitted by this Court vide order dated 21.4.2010 and it was ordered to be heard along with Criminal Appeal No. 1789 of 2009 and Criminal Appeal 2414 of 2009.

3. The brief facts giving rise to present Appeals in nutshell, are as under:-

3.1 The complainant Laljibhai Shankarbhai Vaghela, residing at Chaklasi, Tabe Laxmipura, registered his complaint with Chaklasi Police Station against the accused persons, for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 337, 323, 504, 436 and 114 of IPC stating therein that on 7.06.2008 at about 4:30 p.m. the complainant returned to his home from Chaklasi, and he was passing in front of house of Taraben Pratapbhai Vaghela his Bhabhi. At that time, the accused no.1 Manubhai Dahyabhai, accused no.2 Hasmukh Manubhai and accused no.3 Raysingh Hathibhai came there, by keeping ago grudge about filling water. All the accused threw the stones on complainant and on seeing that one Bhagvanbhai Desaibhai Vaghela came there. The accused also throw the stone on him, so he received stone injuries on his right leg.

3.2 Thereafter, all the accused also set on fire to the house of Taraben. Thereafter, the complainant and his Bhabhi went to the Police Station for lodging complaint against the accused persons and on the way, accused no.4 Ambalal Dahyabhai and accused no.5 Ashvinbhai Ambalal Vaghela met them and threatened them not to lodge any complaint against them and also used filthy language and abuses and inflicted stick blows on head of Taraben and because of the said blow she became unconscious and fell down on the floor. They also inflicted stick blows on left hand of complainant. On hearing the shout of complainant and Taraben, Mathurbhai Mangalbhai Vaghela came there, and rescued complainant and Taraben from further assault of the accused persons. Thereafter, the complainant and Taraben were taken to the Chaklasi Hospital, and then Taraben admitted to the Civil Hospital Nadiad for further treatment.

3.3 Thereafter, on the basis of FIR, the jurisdictional police machinery put in to motion and on completion of investigation the chargesheet was filed before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nadiad. The said case was committed to the Court of Sessions and as per the provisions of 209 of Criminal Procedure Code, on completion of the formalities of committal, the case was registered as Sessions Case No.37 of2009. Thereafter, charge was framed against accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 337, 323, 504, 436 and 114 of Indian Penal Code. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution has led evidence and has examined 12 witnesses as well as produced 12 documentary evidences on the record of the case.

3.4 At the conclusion of the trial, trial Court passed judgment and order dated 15.09.2009 in Sessions Case No. 37