The court has the power to allow compounding of offences under Section 320 Cr.P.C. based on a compromise between the parties, as established in the decision of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

JUDGMENT

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - This criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dated 11.01.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 3, Jodhpur in criminal appeal No. 24/2008 (229/07), partly allowing the appeal of the present petitioner against the judgment dated 18.06.2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur in Original Criminal Case No. 244/2002.

1.1. Vide the impugned judgment dated 18.06.2007, the learned trial court convicted the present petitioners for the offences under Sections 148, 323, 341 & 325/149 IPC; for the offence under Section 148 IPC, each of the petitioners were sentenced to undergo two years S.I., and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of which, each of them were to undergo further four months S.I.; for the offence under Section 323 IPC, each of the petitioners were sentenced to undergo six months S.I., and a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of which, each of them were to undergo further two months S.I.; for the offence under Section 341 IPC, each of the petitioners were sentenced to undergo one month's S.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of which, each of the petitioners were to undergo further seven days S.I. and; for the offence under Section 325/149 IPC, each of the petitioners were sentenced to undergo five years S.I. and a fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of payment of which, each of them were to undergo further six months S.I.

1.2. The learned appellate court, upon the aforementioned judgment dated 18.06.2007 being challenged by way of the aforementioned criminal appeal by the present petitioners, vide the impugned judgment dated 11.01.2010, while partly allowing the appeal, acquitted the present petitioners of the offences under Section 148, 341 & 149 IPC; however, vide the said impugned judgment, the present petitioners' conviction under Sections 323 & 325 IPC was affirmed and maintained by the learned appellate court. The learned appellate court, vide the impugned judgment dated 11.01.2010, for the offence under Section 323 IPC, sentenced each of the petitioners to undergo three months S.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of which each of the petitioners were to undergo further one months S.I.; for the offence under Section 325 IPC, each of the petitioners were sentenced to undergo two years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 3000/-, in default of payment of which each of them were to undergo further three months S.I.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have entered into a compromise in the on-going criminal proceedings, which is also evident from the order-sheet of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court dated 29.09.2022, thus, they are not inclined to proceed further in the matter.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that under Section 320 sub-section (6) of the Cr.P.C., the High Court in exercise of its revisional powers may allow any person to compound any offence(s), which such person would be competent to do. and that the conviction and sentence against the petitioners, pursuant to passing of the impugned judgment dated 11.01.2010 by the learned appellate court, now the offences remained to be compounded are under Sections 323 & 325 IPC which may be compounded, in the manner provided as under Section 320 Cr.P.C.

For the sake of brevity, the said Section is reproduced hereinunder:-

320. Compounding of offences-

(1) ...

to

(5) ...

(6) A High Court or Court of Session acting in the exercise of its powers of revision under section 401 may allow any person to compound any offence which such person is competent to compound under this section.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. [ (2012) 10 SCC 303].

5. It is also submitted that aforesaid compromise duly signed by the respective parties has been presented by the parties b