1. - The petitioner is facing trial for the offences under sections 307, 394 read with section 397, and 398 and 324 Indian Penal Code and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act. The petitioner moved an application to grant permission to compromise the case as he had entered into a compromise with the complainant, who was the injured person. This application has been refused by the Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur on the ground that the offences are non-compoundable. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Mahesh Chand and another v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1988 SC 2111 and Kailash Chand and others v. Smt. Basanti, 1989 Cr.L.R. (Rajasthan) 558 in order to contend that even in non-compoundable cases the Supreme Court and this Court have given directions to compromise the matter.

2. I have considered the contentions and perused the record. It can be said that when the application for permission to compromise the case is moved, then one of the things which the court ought to consider is whether a non-compoundable offence can be said to have been made out on the basis of the material which has been placed on record so far. The injury report and the opinion