THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.6747 of 2008 This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short Cr.P.C.) for quashing of the Order dated 02.04.2008 passed in Crl.M.P.No.141 of 2008 in Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007 on the file of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool and to pass such other order or Orders as the Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. The petitioner herein is the victim in Sessions Case No.340 of 2006 on the file of Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool and respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein are the accused in the said Sessions Case and they were prosecuted for the offences under Sections 147, 306 and 509 read with 149 IPC and they were acquitted for the offence under Section 306 and 147 IPC and convicted for the offence under Section 143 IPC and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and further they were convicted for the offence under Section 509 IPC and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- each. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, respondent Nos.2 to 6 have filed Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007 on the file of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool. During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner herein has filed a petition under Section 320 (2) Cr.P.C. to permit the petitioner for compounding the offences in the interest of justice. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the said application holding that the offence under Section 509 IPC is compoundable under Section 320 (2) Cr.P.C., but the offence under Section 143 IPC is not compoundable. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner has pleaded that even though the offence under Section 143 IPC is not compoundable as the major offence under Section 509 IPC is compoundable, Section 143 IPC may be ordered to be compounded in order to maintain cordial relationship between the accused and the petitioner in the village. Now, the point that has to be considered is: Whether the offence under Section 143 IPC can be permitted to be compounded? P O I N T: The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision rendered in BAIJU v. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE[1]. Wherein the Single Judge of the Kerala High Court while taking into consideration of the various decisions of the Apex Court allowed the revision filed by the accused and permitted to compound the offences under Sections 143, 147 and 148 of IPC. In the above said decision, the accused were convicted for the offences under Sections 143, 447, 148 and 324 IPC. In the appeal A.4 and A.5 were found not guilty and thereby acquitted, and the conviction and sentence in respect of A.1 to A.3 were confirmed. Against which, a revision was filed by A.1. During the pendency of the revision, a petition was filed by the injured stating that they have compounded the offence with A.1 and sought for permission of the Court to compound the matter. The learned Single Judge of Kerala High Court while relying upon the decisions rendered in (2003) 4 SCC 675, 2005 (2) KLT 429, (1988) 1 SCC 692 and (2005) SCC (Crl.) 320 has observed that even though the offences under Sections 143, 147 and 148 are not compoundable, the Court should consider the facts and circumstances of each case and allow the parties to compromise, thereby to restore an amicable and harmonious relationship between the parties, which otherwise would likely to result in an enduring feud. In view of the above basic principles laid down by the Apex Court, as well as to maintain amity and harmony among the persons involved in a crime, it is necessary for the Court to grant permission to compound the offence, even if they are not compoundable as per the procedure, and also that such offence does not seriously affect the interest of the public at large. In the present case, the accused were convicted for the offences under Sections 143 and 509 IPC. The petitioner, who is the victim, wants to compound the offence with the accused to maintain harmony in the village. The said compounding of the offence by the victim with the accused does not affect the interest of the State or general public at large. Therefore, in view of the above said decision, in order to maintain harmonious relationship between the parties, it would be proper to permit the petitioner to compound the offence under Section 143 IPC. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled for quashing of the Order as prayed for. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed and the Order dated 02.04.2008 passed in Crl.M.P.No.141 of 2008 in Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2007 on the file of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool, is hereby quashed and in view of the observations made above, the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool is permitted to compound the offence under Section 143 IPC also. _____________________ P.DURGA PRSAD, J 7th April, 2011 KSP [1] 2006 Crimes (3) 671