Criminal Revision No. 1571 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: March 06, 2009 Criminal Revision No. 1571 of 2004 Karamjit Singh ...........Petitioner Versus Dalbir Singh and another ..........Respondents Criminal Revision No. 1620 of 2004 Jasvinder Singh and another ...........Petitioners Versus Dalbir Singh and another ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.H.R.Nohria, Advocate and Mr.B.S.Sidhu,Advocate (CRR No.1620 of 2004) for the petitioner. Ms.Gurvir Kaur, Advocate for the respondent-complainant Mr.Amandeep Singh,Rai,Assistant Advocate General, Punjab ** Sabina, J. This judgment would dispose of the above-mentioned Criminal Revision No. 1571 of 2004 2 two revision petitions as both have arisen out of the common judgment. Petitioners- Jaswinder Singh and Karamjit Singh along with Karnail Singh and Tejinder Singh were tried for an offene under Sections 326, 325, 324, 323, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) in a complaint filed by Dalbir Singh. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur vide judgment and order dated 24.7.2003 convicted and sentenced the petitioners as well as their co-accused for an offence under Sections 148, 326,325,324,323/149 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Sangrur vide judgment dated 14.7.2004. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para 2 of its judgment, are as under:- "The present complaint was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur, on 10.3.1999 by Dalbir Singh complainant- respondent for prosecution of the present accused-appellants for offences punishable under Sections 326,325, 323, 324, 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged by the complainant that his father got land measuring 9 Bighas 12 Biswas situated in village Chatha Sekhwan from the government by depositing a sum of Rs. 4,017/- thereof. The mutation was sanctioned in his favour and he was in its possession since its allotment. The accused wanted to grab the said land forcibly. Father of complainant filed a suit against them in the civil Court seeking injunction to restrain them from interfering in his possession. In that civil suit, demarcation report was sought Criminal Revision No. 1571 of 2004 3 which was reported in favour of father of complainant. It is further alleged that on 8.11.1997 the complainant, his brother Jaswant Singh (CW4) and their father Piara singh CW6 were working in their fields, where all he accused persons armed with deadly weapons i.e. Gandasas and Ghopes came there and caused grievous and simple injuries to them. The injured were taken to Civil Hospital, Sangrur, where they were medico legally examined and injuries on their person were found grievous in nature." In the present case, the occurrence had taken place on 8.11.1997, whereas, the complaint in question was filed on 11.3.1999. Thus, there is a lot of delay in filing the complaint which makes the complainant's case doubtful. Initially, a DDR No. 21 dated 9.11.1997 was recorded to the effect that a compromise had been effected between the parties with regard to the occurrence in question. Now, during the pendency of the revision petition, parties have arrived at a compromise which has been placed on record as Annexure P1 and the same is duly signed by the complainant-Dalbir Singh as well as injured- Jaswant Singh. Injured Piara Singh has since died. A perusal of the compromise reveals that now with the intervention of respectables of village, relatives and friends, parties do not want to pursue the case as no dispute exists between them. Parties want to live in peace in future. The complainant party would not pursue the case in this Court, if the compromise is accepted by the Court. Affidavits of Dalbir Singh and Jaswant Singh have also been placed on record as Annexures P2 and P3. It has been stated in the affidavits that as per the compromise, the deponents Criminal Revision No. 1571 of 2004 4 requested that the revision petition pending in this Court be accepted and decided . As per compromise, they do not want to pursue with the case. Keeping in view the above facts, the present revision deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the judgments of the Courts below are set aside and the petitioners are acquitted of the charge framed against them. (Sabina) Judge March 06, 2009 arya Criminal Revision No. 1571 of 2004 5 3. It is further alleged that complainant reported the matter promptly to the police of police station, Sangrur but the police did not hear them and had been putting off the matter instead of taking action against the accused, police rather threatened the complainant with dire consequences and obtained their thumb impressions by coercion. The complainant and other injured did not enter into compromise with the accused nor they ever stated before police that they wanted no action against the assailants. Police obtained their thumb impressions on blank papers. The representations made by them before District Police Chief also could not be helpful for initiation of action against the accused. The complainant and other injured,therefore, approached the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana through a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in which the Hon'ble High Court passed order dted 10.8.1998 about the remedy available to the complainant. When ultimately the police flatly refused to register case against the accused-appellants, complainant filed the present complain