IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1985 of 2003() ------------------------------ (C.C.NO.169/1996 OF JFCM, PEERUMEDU CRA.NO.80/99 OF ADDL. SESSIONS (ADHOC-1), COURT, THODUPUZHA) REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. LALAGI, S/O. MANI, NALANKAL HOUSE, VAGAMON. 2. REMESAN, S/O. RAGHAVAN, KUCHUKATTIL HOUSE, VAGAMON. 3. SELVARAJ, S/O. KOCHUKUNJU, CHERIVILLA PUTHENVEETTIL, PUNALOOR. 4. LEVAN, S/O. MANI, NALANKAL HOUSE, VAGAMON. 5. KUSAN, S/O. MANI, NALANKAL HOUSE, VAGAMON. BY ADV. SRI.SEBASTIAN DAVIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEERUMEDU POLICE STATION, PEERUMEDU. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.1985 OF 2003 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 ORDER Revision petitioners are the accused persons in C.C.No.169/1996 of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu and appellants in Crl.Appeal No.80/1999 of Additional Sessions (Adhoc - I) Court, Thodupuzha. They were convicted under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 326 r/w Section 149 of IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each under Section 326 of IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each under Section 148 IPC and 324 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each under Sections, 143, 147 and 323 IPC In default of payment of total fine of Rs. 2500/- by each of the accused, they were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six months by the trial court. On appeal, the lower appellate court confirmed their conviction and sentence, but no separate sentence was awarded under Sections 143 and 147 IPC. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 50% of the Crl.R.P.No.1985/03 Page numbers fine amount recovered was ordered to be paid to PW1 as compensation. The accused persons have come up in revision challenging their conviction and sentence. 2. The case of the prosecution as shaped in evidence before the trial court was that on 12-09-1995 at about 8.30 p.m. the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons at Pazhayachantha Kavala junction at Vagamon Town and first accused beat PW1 on his forehead with a stick, second accused beat PW1 with an iron rod and third accused stabbed PW1 with a knife, fourth accused beat PW1 with a cycle chain many times and the fifth accused cut PW1 with a sword causing the injuries described in Ext.P4 wound certificate and that thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 326 r/w Section 149 of IPC. 3. When the accused persons appeared before the trial court, they pleaded not guilty to a charge under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 326 r/w Section 149 of IPC. PWs 1 to 10 were examined and Exts.P1 too P8 were marked on the side of the prosecution. When Crl.R.P.No.1985/03 Page numbers questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the accused persons denied the entire incident. No defence evidence was adduced. 4. The trial court on an appreciation of evidence found the revisoin petitioners guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 326 r/w Section 149 of IPC, convicted them thereunder and sentenced them as aforesaid. The lower appellate court confirmed their conviction, but modified the sentence as mentioned above. The accused persons have now come up in revision challenging their conviction and sentence. 5. When the revision petition came up for hearing, revision petitioners and defacto complainant PW1 filed a petition seeking permission to compound the offences under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC which was allowed by me. It was also stated in that petition that the offence under Section 326 of IPC was also compounded. But the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148 and under Section 326 are non-compoundable. It has been held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab ( 2008(3) KLT 19 (SC)) that criminal proceedings involving noncompoundable offences can be Crl.R.P.No.1985/03 Page numbers quashed by accepting the terms of compromise reached between the rival parties, if the question involved in such disputes is purely of a personal nature. In a subsequent decision in Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation ( 2008(3) KLT 769(SC)), the Apex Court has quashed the proceedings on the basis of compromise arrived at between the rival parties where accused persons were charged under Prevention of Corruption Act. 6. This court had occasion to consider the above aspect in Baiju v. S.I.of Police ( 2006(3) KLT 49) and Ettoop v. Kunhikrishnan (2005(2)KLT 429) and held that even in noncompoundable offences if the parties settle the disputes, the proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the interests of justice. 7. In the light of the principles laid down in the above decisions, in the present case also a compromise has been arrived at between the rival parties and the question involved in the dispute is purely of personal nature. That being so, revision petition has to be allowed and the conviction and sentence passed against the revision Crl.R.P.No.1985/03 Page numbers petitioners under Sections 143, 147, 148 and under Section 326 of IPC has to the set aside and revision petitioners have to be acquitted. In the result, revision petition is allowed. Conviction and sentence passed against the revision petitioners under Sections 143, 147, 148 and Section 326 of IPC is set aside . As the offences under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC have already been compounded, the revision petitioners are acquitted of all offences alleged against them under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. The fine amount, if deposited by the accused persons before the trial court shall be refunded to them. P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. Crl.R.P.No.1985/03 Page numbers