ORDER :

1. In the wake of instant surge in COVID – 19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to allow this criminal appeal and the impugned judgment and order dated 21.11.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Salumber, District Udaipur, convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offences under Sections 341, 323/34, 324/34, 326/34, 307/34 of IPC and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act, may kindly be quashed and set aside and the appellants may kindly be acquitted for the said offence."

3. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the matter is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Sohan Puri & Ors. Vs. State (S.B. Criminal Appeal No.894/2005, decided on 23.03.2022), which reads as under:

“1. In the wake of instant surge in COVID – 19 cases and spread of its highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in the Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. These criminal appeals, under Section 374 Cr.P.C have been preferred claiming the following reliefs: Appeal No. 894/2005: “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the appeal of the appellants may kindly be allowed and the judgment dt.25.11.05 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bikaner in Sessions case No.317/2003 – State Vs. Sohan Puri & Ors. may kindly be quashed and set aside to the extent of conviction to the appellants, and the appellants may kindly be acquitted from the charges.”

Appeal No. 910/2005:

“Therefore, it is prayed by the humble appellant that this Criminal appeal may kindly be allowed and the impugned Judgment dated 25.11.2005 passed by the Additional Session Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Bikaner may kindly be quashed and set aside and benefit of probation act may kindly be given to the present appellant because no other criminal case is pending against him, therefore, it would in the interest of justice to grant him benefit of probation act. Record of the trial court may kindly be directed to called for the proper decision of the case.”

3. The brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by Mr. Vineet Jain, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Pravin Vyas appearing on behalf of the appellants are that the appellants were convicted for offences under Sections 148, 307, 307/149, 323, 323/149, 324/149, 326 & 326/149 I.P.C. vide the impugned judgments, dated 25.11.2005, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 317/03 & 18/2005.

3.1 The present controversy arose when both the parties had staked claim over possession of a certain land, and that in the heat of the moment, a physical tussle broke out between the parties in respect of the land in question, and F.I.R.s were lodged and cross cases were filed, subsequent to said incident. Thus, as per the pleaded facts, the present criminal appeals pertain to the said cross cases between the parties.

3.2 The present appeals preferred against the judgments of conviction in question were admitted and the sentences so awarded to the appellants were suspended. However, upon an application being preferred by the applicant/appellant Shiv Puri @ Babu Puri under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of his conviction (in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.894/2005), the same was allowed by this Hon’ble Court on 14.12.2016. Thereafter, while the criminal appeals were pending consideration before this Hon’ble Court, a compromise was entered into between the parties (in criminal appeal No.894/2005), which upon being presented before this Hon’ble Court on 22.01.2020, was ordered to be verified by the Registrar (Judicial); the same was accordingly verified on the same day.