Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J.
Gurpreet Singh and others - Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
CRA-S-442-SB-2009 (O&M)
Decided on : 07-06-2023
Compoundable Offences - Criminal Proceedings Quashed - [Compoundable Offences] - [Sections 307, 323, 452, 148, 149 IPC] - The court acquitted the appellants of the charges under Sections 307, 323, 452, 148, 149 IPC and allowed the compound of the offences based on the compromise between the parties.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for offences under Sections 307, 323, 452, 148, and 149 IPC for an incident involving a dispute over a passage leading to the complainant's house. The injured parties were admitted to the hospital with serious injuries, and the appellants were charged based on the prosecution's evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the offence under Section 307 IPC was not made out against the appellants as the intention to cause such bodily injuries, which would attract Section 307 IPC, was missing. However, the court found sufficient evidence to convict the appellants under Sections 326, 323, 452, 148, 149 IPC.
Issues: The main issue was whether the offence under Section 307 IPC was proved against the appellants and whether the parties could compound the offences based on an amicable settlement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the offence under Section 307 IPC was not made out due to the absence of intention to cause injuries sufficient to cause death. However, the court allowed the compound of the offences based on the compromise between the parties, citing the judgment in 'Ramgopal and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh'.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellants of the charges under Sections 307, 323, 452, 148, 149 IPC and allowed the compound of the offences based on the compromise between the parties.
JUDGMENT :
N.S.Shekhawat J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 15.01.2009 and order of sentence dated 22.01.2009, passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, whereby the present appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 452, 148 and 149 and were sentenced to undergo as under:-
| Under Section 307 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Under Section 323/149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. |
| Under Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for one year |
| Under Section 452 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Appellant Dharminder Singh | |
| Under Section 307/149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Under Section 323/149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. |
| Under Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for one year |
| Under Section 452 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Appellant Gurmail Singh | |
| Under Section 307/149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Under Section 323 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. |
| Under Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for one year |
| Under Section 452 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Appellant Harjinder Singh | |
| Under Section 307/149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Under Section 323 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. |
| Under Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for one year |
| Under Section 452 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Appellant Buta Singh | |
| Under Section 307/149 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
| Under Section 323 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500,/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. |
| Under Section 148 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for one year |
| Under Section 452 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. |
2. The FIR in the instant case was got registered by Harinder Singh, injured, complainant by making a statement be
Point of Law : 15.5. Section 482 of Code to quash criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on ground that....
A conviction for attempt to murder requires independent proof of murderous mens rea, which cannot be presumed solely from the severity of injuries. When an assault is spontaneous and lacks evidence o....
(1) Compounding of offence – Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence.(2) Mere mention of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the offence under Section 307 of IPC is not a private offence but a crime against society, and the nature of the injuries and seriousness of t....
The court emphasized that FIRs for heinous offences like Section 307 IPC cannot be quashed based solely on compromise, prioritizing societal impact and the possibility of conviction.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
