Criminal Revision No. 1302 of 2013 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1302 of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision : 01.05.2013 [ENTITY] Petitioners Versus [ENTITY] Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for the respondent. [ENTITY], J. (Oral)
The matrix of the facts and material, which need a necessary mention, for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, are that, initially the complainant-[ENTITY] son of [ENTITY] respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant") filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner-convict [ENTITY] son of [ENTITY], for the commission of an offence punishable under [SECTION] of the [ACT] (hereinafter to be referred as "the [ACT]").
2. Taking into consideration the oral as well as documentary evidence brought on record by the parties, the petitioner-convict was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 year, to pay a fine of ` 10000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for a period of one month, u/[SECTION] of the [ACT], by the trial Court, by virtue of impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.01.2012.
3. Aggrieved thereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner-convict was dismissed as well, by the appellate Court, by way of impugned judgment dated 02.04.2013.
4. The petitioner-convict still did not feel satisfied and preferred the instant revision petition, to challenge the impugned judgments of conviction & orders of sentence, invoking the provisions of [SECTION] [ACT].
5. During the pendency of the present revision petition, good sense prevailed and the parties have amicably settled their dispute and compounded the offence, by means of compromise deed dated 29.04.2013 (Annexure 'PX'), which in substance is as under: -
"Whereas, misunderstanding between both the parties stand removed and they have compromised the matter amicably and [ENTITY] of the First Party have agreed to pay the entire cheque amount of Rs.4,86,000/- (Rupees Four Lakh Eighty Six Thousand only) to [ENTITY] of the Second Part vide Bank Draft No.375991 dated 10.04.2013 issued by the Indian Bank, Sector 45 Chandigarh (to be handed over to [ENTITY] in Hon'ble High Court), and have also paid Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) in cash as litigation expenses and no grievances whatsoever, are left in this regard.
That the party of the Second part is fully satisfied and has no objection if the offence in this case is allowed to be compounded and conviction is set aside by this Hon'ble High Court and accused [ENTITY] is ordered to be acquitted."
6. Sequelly, it is not a matter of dispute that the petitioner- convict has already handed over the indicated cheque to the complainant in pursuance of the settlement deed.
7. Above being the position on record, now the short and significant question, though important, that arises for determination in this petition is, as to whether the impugned judgments are liable to be quashed in view of the settlement or not ?
8. Having regard to the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties, to me, the answer must obviously be in the affirmative. Moreover, learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present revision petition is liable to be accepted, in view of the compounding of offence and amicably settlement between the parties.
9. What cannot possibly be disputed here is that [SECTION] of the [ACT] postulates that every offence punishable under this Act shall be compoundable. It is now well settled principle of law that once the erring party has made the payment of entire amount, then, he is entitled to compound the offence, as contemplated under [SECTION] of the [ACT]. This matter is no more res integra and is now well settled.
10. An identical question came to be decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in cases [ENTITY] v. R.Rajathi Represented by P.O.A.P.Kaliappan, 2010 (1) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 185; [PRECEDENT] and by this Court in case [PRECEDENT], wherein it was ruled that under such circumstances, the parties should be permitted to compound the indicated offence.
11. Therefore, once, it is proved on record that the parties have compounded the offence, compromised the matter and as the petitioner convict has already made the entire payment of amount of cheque & compensation in the manner depicted here-in-above, therefore, to my mind, it would be in the interest and justice would be sub-served, if the parties are allowed to compound the offence to enable them to live in peace in future. There is no impediment in this relevant connection, in view of the provisions of [SECTION] of the [ACT] read with [SECTION] [ACT] and the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in [ENTITY], [ENTITY] cases and of this Court in [PRECEDENT]'s case (supra). Meaning thereby, the ratio of law laid down in the aforesaid judgments is fully applicable to the facts of the present case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.
12. In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant revision petition is hereby accepted and the impugned judgments of conviction and orders of sentence are set aside. Consequently, the petitioner-convict is acquitted of the charge framed against him, in view of compounding of offence as contemplated under [SECTION] of [ACT] and [SECTION] [ACT] in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
13. Needless to mention in case the petitioner-convict failed to comply with the terms and conditions contained in the indicated compromise, then the respondent-complainant would be at liberty to move a petition for revival of the main revision petition.
May 01, 2013 ([ENTITY]) naresh.k Judge