IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 385/2004 Date of decision: 29.6.2011 State of H.P. …..Appellant Versus Gajender Mohan and others ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Appellant: Mr. A.K. Bansal Addl. Advocate General. For the respondent : Mr. Chaman Negi, Advocate. Surinder Singh, J. (Oral) Vide order dated 5.5.2004, passed in case No. 48-2 of 2003, respondents were acquitted by the learned trial Court for the offences punishable under Section 147, 149, 325 and 341 Indian Penal Code on the basis of the compromise effected inter se the accused-respondents and the complainant. Now the present appeal has been filed on the ground that Section 147 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code are not compoundable thus the order 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes - 2 - of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court, on the basis of the compromise is wrong and illegal. 2. Heard and gone through the record. 3. As a matter of fact, respondents were chargesheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 341, 325 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code. The matter was fixed for evidence but before that the matter was compromised. Though Section 341 and 325 are compoundable as per Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure but offences punishable under Sections 147 and 149 Indian Penal Code are non- compoundable. Therefore, the learned trial Court has no jurisdiction to record acquittal for the said offences on the basis of the said compromise as such the impugned order is unsustainable being wrong and illegal, therefore, set aside. The State appeal is accordingly allowed. The case is remanded back to the learned trial Court to proceed in the matter in accordance with law. 4. Parties are hereby directed to be present before the learned trial Court on 28.7.2011. 5. Disposed of. June 29, 2011 (Surinder Singh), (cm) Judge.