D. M. PATNAIK, J.

( 1 ) THE only question raised in this revision is whether the High Court in exercise of its revisional as well as the inherent power can direct the lower court to compound an offence not permissible under S. 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the 'code' ).

( 2 ) PROSECUTION case is, deceased Pranakrushna Panda had purchased a piece of land from the petitioners situated near his Bari side and the deceased had put a fence on the boundary line. On 3-6-87 at about 8 p. m. , hearing petitioner Golak removing the fence put by the deceased, the latter reached the spot and protested. There was an altercation. Thereafter, petitioner Golak dealt a blow with a spade on the head of deceased Pranakrushna causing a bleeding injury. Pranakrushna was removed to the hospital in an unconscious state and was treated as an indoor patient, but died on 24-6-87. The petitioners faced trial for the offence punishable under S. 326, IPC and nine P. Ws. were examined from the side of the prosecution when a petition was filed on 20-4-91, signed by the son of deceased Pranakrushna and the petitioners, making a prayer therein to the court to permit to compound the offence. It w