-1- Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001 and Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001. IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001. Date of Decision: March 29, 2010. Maid ... Appellant VERSUS State of Haryana ...Respondent Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001. Suresh ... Appellant VERSUS State of Haryana ...Respondent 1. Whether the Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL. Present: Mr. Rahul Vats, Advocate, for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001. None for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001. Ms. Sushma Chopra, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. -.- MOHINDER PAL, J. This judgment will dispose of the afore-mentioned appeals as they arise out of the same occurrence. -2- Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001 and Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001. This is a case of version and cross-version in which both sides received injuries and both sides have been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal. Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001 has been filed by appellant Maid against the judgment of conviction dated 23.2.2001 and the sentence order dated 27.2.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, whereby he was convicted under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (for short `the Code') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three and a half years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001 has been filed by appellant Suresh against the judgment of conviction dated 23.2.2001 and the sentence order dated 27.2.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, whereby he was convicted under Section 307 of the Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six and a half years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default whereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. It was further ordered that half of the fine, if deposited, be given to the injured on account of compensation. After the conviction of both the parties, as mentioned above, better sense prevailed on the parties and they entered into a compromise in the interest of harmony between them. Compromise was placed before the trial Court by the parties after their conviction and before the sentence order was passed. -3- Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001 and Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001. The same has been placed on the record of this case, the authenticity of which has been vouchsafed by Mr. Rahul Vats, Advocate. Appellant Maid in Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001 has undergone incarceration for a little more than a fortnight after his conviction whereas appellant Suresh in Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001 has undergo imprisonment for a little more than four months and ten days after conviction. As per the ratio of law laid down by a Five Judges Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, (2007-3) Punjab Law Reporter 439, there is no statutory bar under the Code of Criminal Procedure which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that it will be of no use to send the appellants to jail again at this stage and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment already undergone by the appellants, would be sufficient. Thus, the conviction of the appellants, as mentioned above, is maintained but the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for the aforesaid offences is reduced to the period already undergone by -4- Criminal Appeal No.311-SB of 2001 and Criminal Appeal No.383-SB of 2001. them keeping in view the compromise between the parties. However, the sentence of fine imposed upon the appellants by the trial Court and the default clause shall remain unaltered. If the appellants have not deposited the amount of fine so far, they will deposit the same before the trial Court within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In addition to the fine already imposed by the trial Court, both the appellants are burdened with costs of litigation of Rs.25,000/- each. The appellants are ordered to deposit Rs.50,000/- (Rs.25,000/- each) in the Government Treasury under the relevant head for payment to the State Legal Services Authority, Haryana, Chandigarh. This amount shall also be deposited by the appellants within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The impugned sentence orders are modified to the extent indicated above. Needless to say, if the appellants fail to deposit the aforesaid amount within the stipulated period, both these appeals shall be deemed to have been dismissed. Resultantly, by invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, these appeals are disposed of in view of the compromise between the parties, mentioned above. March 29, 2010. ( MOHINDER PAL ) ak JUDGE