Point of Law: Court while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.PC can proceed to compound offence even after recording of judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

By way of instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 of Cr.PC read with Section 482 Cr.PC, challenge has been laid to judgment dated 25.2.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kangra at Dharamshala, in Criminal Appeal No. 8-K/X/2015 thereby modifying the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4/7.3.2015, passed by the learned JMFC, Kangra, District Kangra, H.P., in Criminal Case No. 106-II/2005, whereby court below while holding the petitioners-accused guilty of having committed offences punishable under Sections 452, 506 and 205 of IPC read with Section 34 IPC, convicted and sentenced him, as per the description given herein below:-

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that on 16.1.2005 at about 6:20pm, police after having received telephonic information that quarrel was taking place at Zamanabad, entered the information in the DDR at Sr. No. 22 and thereafter, ASI Ramesh Chand alongwith HHC Madan Lal went to Panchayat house, Zamanabad, and recorded the statement of complainant Smt. Suman Lata, who claimed herself to be Advocate, under Section 154 Cr.PC. She alleged that on 16.1.2005 at about 5:45 pm, while she was present in her house alongwith mother-in-law Smt. Samangla Devi and Smt. Dharmo Devi, four persons namely Sandeep Singh & Surender Singh, both sons of Amar Singh, Rajinder Kumar s/o Sh. Saldu Ram and Pardeep Kumar entered her house unauthorizedly carrying iron rods in their hand. She alleged that above named persons started breaking the articles kept in the house and also hurled abuses at her. Complainant alleged that aforesaid persons were looking for one Sanjay Kumar, who at that relevant time was not present in the house. She alleged that in the meanwhile, her brother in law Nishant came there and tried to inquire about the matter from the above named persons, but person namely Billu attacked Nishant with iron rod. In the meantime, Neelam Kumar s/o Dhani Ram came on the spot and snatched the iron rod from Billu, who alongwith other persons ran away from the spot on seeing Nishant, Neelam Kumar and Dhani Ram, however they were later on caught by the villagers near Panchayat house and information of the incident was given to the police on telephone by the villagers. On the basis of aforesaid statement made by the complainant, FIR Ex.PW9/A came to be lodged against the petitioners-accused.

3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, vide judgment dated 4/7.3.2015, held the petitioners-accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Sections 452, 504 and 205 read with Section 34 of the IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as per the description given herein above.

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the court below, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Kangra at Dharmshala, H.P., who while partly allowing the appeal acquitted the accused of offence punishable under Section 205 read with Section 34 of IPC but upheld the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned trial court under Sections 452 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. In the aforesaid background, present petitioners-accused have approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, seeking therein their acquittal after setting aside the judgment of conviction recorded by the court below.

5. Though vide order dated 25.3.2022, this Court suspended the substantive senten