IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminial Revision No. 2482 of 2009 Date of decision : 29.10.2009 Sukhdev Singh and others .....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. A.P.S.Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. D.B.Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.B.S.Teji, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab S. D. ANAND, J. It is common ground that there were cross cases between the parties. The case in which the petitioners were complainant got compounded at the hands of the learned Trial Judge as all the offences with which accused therein were charged, were compoundable. However, the case against the petitioners could not be compounded as one of the offences charged against them were non-compoundable. The only non-compoundable offence is under Section 326 IPC. In view of the fact that the documented compromise deed is on record as Annexure P-1 and it was noticed by the learned Trial Judge in the judgment under challenge itself, the plea made by the parties for compounding of offence shall stand allowed. The petitioners shall stand acquitted of the charge in view of the compounding. Disposed of accordingly. October 29, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter : Yes/No