CRR No. 891 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRR No. 891 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.04.2010 Asru ........ petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sanjiv Sura, Addl. A.G. Haryana for the respondent- State Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate for the complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. FIR No. 255 dated 19.09.2000 under Section 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Punhana, District Mewat was got registered by the complainant against the present petitioner. The trial Court convicted and sentenced the petitioner for an offence under Section 420, 120-B IPC to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- vide judgement and order dated 07.11.2008/08.11.2008. The revision petition against the aforesaid judgement and order convicting and CRR No. 891 of 2010 (O&M) 2 sentencing the present petitioner was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court vide judgement dated 03.02.2010. The present revision petition has been filed against the judgements and order of the trial Court and the lower appellate Court. During the pendency of the present revision petition, a compromise has been effected between the parties. The compromise/affidavit (Annexure P- 1) has also been placed on record. A separate statement of the complainant has also been recorded. As per the compromise, statement and affidavit, complainant Fajru has no objection if the aforesaid offence is compounded and the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court vide judgement and order dated 07.11.2008/08.11.2008 which was later on confirmed by the appellate court vide judgement dated 03.02.2010 are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges. There is no dispute that Section 420 of the IPC is otherwise compoundable with permission of Court. Section 320 (6) of the Criminal Procedure of Code reads as under:- “320(6): A High Court or Court of Session acting in the exercise of its powers of revision under Section 401 may allow any person to compound any offence which such person is competent to compound under this Section.” The Apex Court in the case of Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 910 while quashing the FIR and all proceedings arising out of the same held that the continuation of criminal proceedings in view of the compromise would be CRR No. 891 of 2010 (O&M) 3 an abuse of the process of law. In that case also, the petitioners were convicted under Section 498-A IPC and were sentenced to imprisonment of 18 months. An appeal was filed against the conviction order and during pendency of the appeal the parties had settled their differences. However, they filed petition before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the complainant as well as conviction order on account of the compromise. The High Court dismissed the same. Aggrieved, they challenged the same before the Apex Court. The Apex Court accepted the compromise and quashed the FIR and all the proceedings arising as well as order conviction. This Court in the case of Sukhwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2008 (3) RCR (Criminal) 991 while relying on the judgement of Khursheed and another v. State of UP and another, 2007 (4) RCR (Criminal) 495 allowed the petitioners to compound the offence under Section 452 IPC during the pendency of the appeal. It is apparent from the above that the offence under Section 420 IPC can be compounded with the permission of the Court even after conviction and during the pendency of the appeal or revision. The dispute herein is of personal in nature. Accordingly, in view of the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, statement of the complainant recorded separately and affidavit placed on record, the parties are allowed to compound the offence under Section 420, 120-B IPC in FIR No. 255 dated 19.09.2000 registered at Police Station Punhana, District Mewat. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court vide judgement and order dated CRR No. 891 of 2010 (O&M) 4 07.11.2008/08.11.2008 which was confirmed by the lower Appellate Court vide judgement dated 03.02.2010 is set aside and petitioner-Asru is accordingly acquitted of the aforesaid charge. Criminal Revision is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge January 11, 2010 mohan