IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH th ON THE 11 OF JULY, 2023 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 5550 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

1. SOHAN JANGU S/O MUNSHI KHA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O MULTANPURA MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. TALIB S/O CHAND KHA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST MULTANPUR DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. KAMRU S/O MUNSHI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST MULTANPUR DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. ASLAM S/O RAFIK JANGU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST MULTANPUR DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. CHAND S/O MUNSHI JANGU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST MULTANPUR DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. SHAHJAD S/O MUNSHI JANGU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST MULTANPUR DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANTS (BY SHRI VIKAS JAIN, ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION Y.D.NAGAR DISTT. MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY SHRI SURENDRA GUPTA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

(BY SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE COMPLAINANT)

Signature Not Verified This appeal coming on for orders this day, heard with the consent of parties and the court passed the following:

JUDGMENT

The present appeal is filed against the judgment conviction and sentence dated

08.04.2023 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur in Sessions Trial No.1300191/2016, whereby, the appellant has been convicted under sections 148, 323/149 (three counts), 325/149 and 307/149, 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 1 year RI (each), 6 months R.I. (each), 2 years of R.I. (each) and 10 years of R.I. (each) with fine of Rs.Nil, Rs. Nil, Rs.1,000/- and Rs.5,000/- respectively with default stipulations.

2. As per the prosecution case, the appellants had caused fatal injury to Yusuf, Rashid, Akil and Aameen Bee received simple injuries. No danger weapons have been used. For causing injury to Yusuf, Rashid, Akil and Aameen Bee, they have been convicted under section 148, 323/149 (three counts), 325/149 and 307/149, 307 IPC. The appellants and the complainants filed an application for compounding, as I.A.No.

9214/2023.

3. The said application was sent for verification before the Principal Registrar of the Court. In compliance to the said order, the appellants were produced before the Principal Registrar in Escort and complainants also appeared before the Principal Registrar. The compromise was verified and a report 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.

4. Counsel for the appellant submits that so far as sentence is concerned, the appellant has already undergone jail sentence of more than 3 months and the incident had taken place in the year 2013. The offence under sections 148, 323/149 (three counts), 325/149 and 307/149, 307 of IPC has already been compromised with the Signature Not Verified victim/complainants and therefore, while maintaining the conviction, the jail sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone and the fine amount may be reasonably enhanced which may be directed to be paid to the complainants.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent/state submits that the offence under sections 148, 307 & 149 of IPC are non-compoundable, therefore, the offence cannot be compounded under section 320 of the Cr.P.C. However, rest of the offences are compoundable.

6. The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 after considering the the provisions of section 320 and 482 of the Cr.P.C held that the compounding was permitted in a non- compoundable offence. Relevant part of the order of the order reads as under :-

"Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding