The main legal point established is the court's wide amplitude of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, allowing it to quash criminal proceedings beyond the statutory framework, considering the nature of the offences and voluntary compromises.

JUDGMENT

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - 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 v. 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.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that owing to the fact that the learned Court below acquitted the concerned parties (criminal appeal No. 910/2005) of charges under Section 447 IPC, and that the incident in question occurred in the spur of the moment over 20 years ago, which later on was compromised between the concerned parties.

4.1 As regards accused-appellant Gopal Ram (in Criminal Appeal No. 910/2005), learned Senior Counsel submits that though his name is not appearing in the aforementioned compromise, but since the parties have settled the dispute between them coupled with the fact that the said accused/appellant was held guilty for the offence under Section 323 IPC only, therefore, the indulgence of acquittal may also be granted in his case.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Ramgopal & Anr. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 (4) Crimes 17 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Court observed as und