IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2385 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRA.433/2004 of I ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER-APPELLANT/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------- GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.GOVINDAN, KUZHIVILA THEKKATHIL, KADAVOOR CHERI, THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR RESPONDENT(/ RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN FOR DEFACTO COMPLAINANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SRI C S HRITHWIK THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.2385 of 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this 07th day of August 2009 ORDER Additional respondent No.2 is impleaded. Heard counsel on both sides and Public Prosecutor. 2. Petitioner faced trial in the court of learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kollam in S.C.No.587 of 2000 for offence punishable under section 307 of the Penal Code (for short, “the Code”) on the allegation that on 31-03-1999 at about 5.30 p.m he attempted to commit murder of additional respondent No.2 by assaulting him with a chopper. Prosecution examined Dws1 to 7 and marked Exts.P1 to P8 and MO1 series. Learned Assistant Sessions Judge found petitioner guilty of the charge under section 307 of the Code and sentenced him accordingly. That conviction and sentence were challenged in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Kollam in criminal appeal No.433 of 2004. Learned Sessions Judge while upholding the case of prosecution altered the conviction and sentence from section 307 to 324 of the Code. Judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge is under challenge in this revision. 3. Additional respondent No.2, the defacto complainant has been impleaded in this revision. Himself and petitioner have filed the petition (C.M.A.No.7538 of 2009) reporting that the case is settled between them and requesting that the composition may be accepted. Crl.R.P.No.2385 of 2005 2 It is submitted by both sides the parties are immediate neighbours and that they are now living peacefully. I have gone through the petition and find no reason to think that composition is not voluntary. Offence under section 324 is compoundable with permission of the court. Having regard to the circumstances of the case I am inclined to grant permission sought for. Accordingly C.M.A.No.7538 of 2008 is allowed, permission is granted to compound the offence and the composition is accepted. That shall have the effect of acquittal of petitioner under section 320(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Revision petition is disposed of as above. THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE Sbna/