In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.App. (S.J).No.555 of 2009 with Cr.App.(S.J) No.345 of 2009 with Cr.App.(S.J)No.231 of 2012 [ENTITY][ENTITY] Appellant (Cr.App.No.555 of 2009) [ENTITY] [ENTITY] 3.Miss [ENTITY] 4.Miss [ENTITY] .Appellants (Cr. App. No.345 of 2009) [ENTITY] 2. [ENTITY] [ENTITY] [ENTITY] 5. [ENTITY][ENTITY] Appellants (Cr.Appeal No.231 of 2012) V E R S U S [ENTITY] Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Appellants : Mr.[ENTITY] For the Informant : Mr. [ENTITY] 14/ 15.10.12
. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing for the informant-opposite party no.2.
[CASE NUMBER] and [CASE NUMBER] arising out of the same [CASE NUMBER] were earlier tagged with [CASE NUMBER] which arises out of [CASE NUMBER] but since the parties are the same, all the three matters were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
A case was lodged against all the appellants on the allegation that after the marriage, husband [ENTITY] one of the appellants along with other relatives who are also the appellants started subjecting the informant to torture on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also made an attempt on her life, a case was registered as [CASE NUMBER]. The matter was taken up for investigation.
After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted, upon which cognizance of the offence was taken.
The case of the appellant [ENTITY][ENTITY] ([CASE NUMBER]) was separated and was put on trial. The court having found the appellant [ENTITY] guilty for the offences under [SECTION] and [SECTION] of the [ACT] awarded sentence for two years for an offence under [SECTION] and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for an offence under [SECTION] of the [ACT].
Other appellants ([CASE NUMBER]) when were put on trial, they were also found guilty for an offence under [SECTION] and [SECTION] of the [ACT]. Accordingly, they were convicted and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for an offence under [SECTION] and further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for an offence under [SECTION] of the [ACT].
While the trial was going on in the aforesaid case, the same informant lodged a case against the aforesaid appellants wherein again allegation was made of subjection to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also for causing miscarriage of pregnancy and infliction of grievous injury. That case was registered as [CASE NUMBER]. In that case when charge sheet was submitted, cognizance of the offence was taken and then accused persons were put on trial.
The court having found the appellants guilty for the offences under [SECTION] and [SECTION] of the [ACT] awarded sentence against them.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that while these appeals were pending before this Court, good sense prevailed among the parties and thereby matrimonial dispute which were there between the parties got resolved and they have entered into a compromise and therefore, [CASE NUMBER] has been filed wherein factum of dispute being settled and the parties coming to compromise has been stated and under the circumstances, the parties be allowed to compound the offence, in view of the decision rendered in a case of [PRECEDENT] as well as in a case of [PRECEDENT] and also in a case of [PRECEDENT].
Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, it does appear that while these appeals were pending, the parties got their dispute settled and got the case compromised and on that basis, prayer has been made to accept the compromise and to set aside the order of conviction and sentence.
No doubt the offence under [SECTION] of the [ACT] is non-compoundable but the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case of [PRECEDENT] (supra) after taking notice of the earlier decision has been pleased to observe as follows:
"There is no doubt that the object of introducing [SECTION] of the [ACT] was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. [SECTION] was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper technical view would be counterproductive and would act against interests of women and against the interest of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of [SECTION] of the [ACT]. "
In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there is no difficulty in accepting the compromise arrived at in between the parties, even though alleged offence is non-compoundable in the circumstances stated above which appears tobe a special feature.
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.5.2009 passed in [CASE NUMBER] against the appellant [ENTITY][ENTITY] and also judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 8.4.2009 passed in same [CASE NUMBER] against the appellants as well as judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.1.2012/1.2.2012 passed [CASE NUMBER] are hereby set aside. Consequently, the appellants are hereby acquitted.
In the result, these appeals are allowed.
ND/ ([ENTITY], J.)