The Court can allow the compounding of offences and acquit the accused based on the settlement between the parties, as interpreted in Section 320(5) of Cr.P.C. and Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - This appeal preferred by the State of Himachal Pradesh, against acquittal of respondents No.1 & 2, stands allowed vide judgment dated 05.05.2018, passed by this Court and both the respondents have been convicted under Sections 323, 451 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the long gap between the incident and conviction of respondents, it was deemed appropriate this Court to extend benefit of Probation of Offenders Act to the respondents instead of imposing substantial sentence. Therefore, report of Probation Officer was called upon.

2. During interregnum, complainant-injured Kamla Devi, has preferred an application, i.e. Cr.MP No.887 of 2018, seeking permission to compound the matter with the respondents for the reason that the complainant and respondents are inhabitants of one and same village and as respondents in village relation are maternal grandsons of complainant and they are sons of a daughter of village, i.e. niece of complainant in relation as villagers, and now both the families are living peacefully as dispute between them stands settled completely and the families are not only maintaining good relations but also attending functions of each-other without any ill-will with peaceful and cordial atmosphere after forgetting the bitterness of the past and thus, complainant-injured does not want to pursue the matter any further and instead of sentencing the respondents, she is interested for compounding the matter to continue the peaceful relations between the parties.

3. Statement of complainant Kamla Devi and joint statement of respondents-accused have also been recorded on oath in the Court. The complainant has endorsed the contents of the application and for undertaking of respondents not to repeat such incident she has reasserted the prayer for permission to compound the matter, whereas respondents have also admitted the incident and have further stated that now matter has been settled amicably with the complainant and they have undertaken not to involve in such activities in future and not to harm the complainant and her family members and also that the complainant, who is their maternal grandmother in village relation, has also pardoned them and has agreed to compound the matter.

4. The respondents have been convicted under Sections 323, 451, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. All these offences are compoundable under Section 320(1) of Cr.P.C., without leave of the Court, by the person to whom the hurt is caused under Section 323 IPC, the person in possession of the house trespassed upon under Section 451 IPC and person intimidated under Section 506 IPC.

5. In present case, the complainant Kamla Devi is person to whom hurt is caused and she was the person in possession of the house trespassed upon and she is the person intimidated. Therefore, the offence involved was compoundable without leave of the Court at an initial stage or at the time when respondents were enjoying acquittal. But now, respondents stand convicted by this Court. In such a situation, Section 320 (5) Cr.P.C. shall be relevant, wherein it is provided that when the accused has been convicted and the appeal is pending, no composition for the offence is allowed without leave of the Court before which the appeal is to be heard. In present case, the respondents stand convicted by this Court, but the appeal is yet pending adjudication before this Court for considering the quantum of sentence or extension of benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Therefore, appeal cannot be termed as to have been decided finally.

6. Even, otherwise, three Judges Bench of Hon''ble Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Ors. , (2012) 10 SCC 303, explaining that High Court has inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with no statutory limitation including Section 320 Cr.P.C., has held that these powers are to be e