The court can compound serious offences under IPC such as attempt to murder based on a joint compromise between parties, reaffirming the significance of no criminal antecedents for the appellants.

JUDGMENT :

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

This appeal has been filed to set aside the judgment passed in S.C.No.137 of 2015 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Tirunelveli, dated 24.02.2023.

2. The appellants are Accused No.1 and 2 in S.C.No.137 of 2015 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Tirunelveli, has filed this appeal challenging the conviction passed against the appellants for the offences under Section 34 1 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo one month SI and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo one week SI and for the offence under Section 307 of IPC sentenced to A1 (two counts) to undergo 5 years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to undergo six months simple Imprisonment and for the offence under Section 307 IPC r/w 34 IPC (2 counts), sentenced to A2 (two counts) to undergo 5 years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to undergo six months simple Imprisonment, by the impugned judgment dated 24.02.2023.

3. Prosecution Case:-

According to the prosecution, on 30.03.2015 at about 06.00 p.m., when the second appellant/A2 was taking a bath, the brother-in-law of the second respondent had stalked her and acted as a peeping tons. Hence, there was a quarrel arose between them and A1 said to have attacked the second respondent/defacto complainant and abused them in their community name. The defacto complainant gave a complaint to the respondent Police, based on which, the respondent Police registered a case in Crime No.106 of 2015 for the offences under Sections 341 , 294(b), 326, 307, 506(ii) and 352 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act. The investigating officer conducted the investigation and arrested the accused and collected the materials and filed the final report. The same was taken on the file in P.R.C.No.13 of 2015, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil.

4. On appearance of the appellant, copies of documents relied by the prosecution were furnished to the accused under section 207 of Cr.P.C. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil, committed the case to the Special Court and the case was taken on file in S.C.No.137 of 2015 by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Tirunelveli. Then, he framed necessary charges and questioned the accused. The accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty and stood for trial.

5. To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.20 and exhibited 28 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.28 and produced 7 material objects as M.O.1 to M.O.7. Thereafter, the appellants were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C proceedings regarding the incriminating evidence against them and they denied the same as false and thereafter, the case was posted for evidence on the side of defence. The accused neither produced any documents nor examined any witnesses on his side.

6. The learned trial Judge, on considering the evidence of witnesses and documents, convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence as stated supra. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant preferred this appeal. on the grounds stated in the memorandum of grounds of appeal.

7. Today (03.01.2025), when the matter is taken up for hearing, both counsel on record would submit that they have already filed joint compromise memo, which is extracted here under:-

8. The contents of the above joint compromise memo were read over and explained to both the parties and they would admit the same. The joint compromise memo filed by both the parties is recorded.

9. In view of the compromise made between the parties and considering the