JUDGMENT

With consent of the parties heard finally.

1. This criminal appeal under section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.7.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khachrod, District- Ujjain in Sessions Trial No. 100251/2017, whereby the appellants have been convicted for offence under sections 148, 307/149, 323/149 of IPC, and sentenced to undergo 01 year, 07- 07 years and 01-01 years R.I with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, 10,000/-10,000/- and Rs. 1000/- 1000/- respectively with default stipulations.

2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant Rajaram lodged an FiR that the field of the appellants and the complainant are adjacent. On 27.1.2017, he was working on his field with his sons then Govind, Virendra, Bhagwan, Mangal and Ramsingh alonwith a juvenile came on the spot armed with deadly weapons and abused the complainant, when the complainant's son Mahendra tried to stop for not abusing in filthy language, they assaulted the complainant and his sons and the appellants left the spot by threatening them to kill. Thereafter, the complainant has filed a complaint and on the basis of which police registered the case under sections 307, 147, 148, 149 and 506 of IPC against the accused person. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under sections 148, 307/149, 323/149 of IPC. A cross case was also registered by the appellants against the complainant party.

3. Before this Court, both the parties have filed an application for compounding the offences.

4 . The said application was sent for verification before the Principal Registrar vide order dated 28.8.2023. In compliance to the said order, the appellants and complainants also appeared before the Principal Registrar. The compromise was verified and a report dated 6.9.2023 has been submitted that accused/appellants and the complainants have entered into compromise with mutual consent. There is no dispute remaining between the accused/appellants and the complainants. But as per the aforesaid report, the offence under sections 148, 307/149 of IPC are non-compoundable.

5. Counsel for the appellants submits that so far as sentence is concerned, the appellants have already undergone jail sentence of more than one month and the incident had taken place in the year 2017. Compromise has already been done between the parties and therefore, while maintaining the conviction, the jail sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by enhancing the fine amount on the basis of compromise.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent/state has opposed the prayer. However, counsel for the objector i.e. appellants of CRA. No.10169/2023 (cross-appeal) has not objected and fairly admitted that they have compromised the case with the appellants.

7. Nevertheless, the appellant has not impugned the merits of conviction and confined their arguments as to sentencing of the appellants on the basis of compromise application, but still this appellate Court is of the view to examine the sanctity of conviction. On this aspect, I have gone through the order of the trial Court. The prosecution case is not only fortified by the eye-witnesses including the injured persons, but also well supported by medical testimony and documentary evidence adduced before the trial Court. In view of the whole evidence produced by the prosecution, conclusion of learned trial Court regarding conviction appears to be on sound reasonings, it does not warrant any interference. Accordingly, the finding with regard to conviction under sections 148, 307/149 (two counts) of IPC, is hereby affirmed.

8. So far as the offence under section 323 r/w 149 (two counts) of IPC is concerned, it is compoundable with the leave of this Court. Since there is no public interest involved in this case, the leave for compromise is granted and in the effect of that, the appellants are acqu