Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3888
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
GAJENDRA SINGH, J
SODAN SINGH AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 12039 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Manoj Saxena
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Mr. Hariom Choudhary
Importance of compromise in proceedings for compoundable offences under IPC.
Headnote:This appeal challenges the conviction and sentence under Sections 307/34, 323/34 and 452 IPC. The appellants were convicted for attempted murder and house trespass, with a sentence of imprisonment and fines imposed. The court notes a compromise application by the parties and finds the charge under Section 323/34 compoundable, thus allowing acquittal for that charge. The conviction for others is affirmed with a reduction of sentence to the time already served due to the facts and compromise.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the conviction under ipc. (Para 1) |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH th ON THE 4 OF JULY, 2025 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 12039 of 2024 SODAN SINGH AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:
Mr. Manoj Saxena, counsel for the appellants.
Mr. Rajesh Joshi, public prosecutor for the respondent/State. Mr. Hariom Choudhary, counsel for the complainant/victim.
ORDER Heard finally with the consent of respective parties.
This appeal has been preferred by the appellants challenging the conviction and sentence for committing the offence punishable under Section 307/34, 323/34 and 452 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 , for attempting to murder of one Vishnu and six months RI for causing injury to Prakashbai and one year RI under Section 452 IPC for causing house tresspass with fine of Rs.2000/- and Rs.1000/- with default stipulation of six and three months RI for each appellant vide judgment dated 23.09.2024 in Sessions Case No.195/2023 by learned Sessions Judge, Shajapur (MP).
02. The appellants have been convicted regarding the incident dated 21.06.2023 at about 6:00 am Bardia - Gurjar, Police-Station - Sundersi, District - Shajapur (MP) regarding which a Crime No.89/2023 was registered Signature Not Verified at Police-Station - Sundersi, District - Shajapur.
03. Counsel for the appellants submitted that they are not challenging the conviction and instead they are pressing for quantum of sentence of the appellants.
04. Both the parties have filed the compromise application and the same has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court.
05. The offence under Section 323 /34 of IPC is compoundable in nature without leave of the court. Accordingly, the appellants are acquitted from the charges of Section 323 /34. Rest of the offence are non-
compoundable and compromise filed by the parties is being considered. 06. Paragraph 15 of the judgment discloses that both the parties belongs to the same family and the appellants/accused are the cousin of victim -Vishnu (PW/1) and dispute arose due to execution of sale deed regarding Survey No.213/2, Area-0.013 hectares and Survey No.209/3, Area
0.04 hectares, Total Area-0.17 hectares by father of victim Vishnu (PW/1).
07. The appellant No.1 has undergone the period of custody of fourteen months and appellant No.2 has undergone the custody period of one year.
08. It is stated that there is no criminal antecedents of present appellants.
09. Considering the facts mentioned in para 56 of the judgment and the genesis of incident, as well as the compromise arrived at between the parties, this appeal is partly allowed and appellants are acquitted from the charge of Section 323 /34 IPC and conviction under Section 307/34 & 452 Signature Not Verified IPC is affirmed. Their sentence of imprisonment under Section 452 IPC is reduced to the period already undergone. The fine deposited by the appellants shall be paid to the victim under Section 357 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 .
10. Accordingly, the criminal appeal stands disposed of, in aforesaid terms.
