Patna High Court
Shyam Behari Singh vs Sagar Singh on 25 July, 1919
Equivalent citations: 53IND. CAS.824, AIR 1920 PATNA 828
JUDGMENT Coutts, J.
1. In this case a complaint was made under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, and Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act against two persons, Sham Behari Singh and Hurnandan Singh. After process had issued the complainant, Sagar Singh, filed a petition to the effect that Hurnandan Singh had expressed his sorrow, that be had accepted his apology and asked that he should be acquitted without hearing. The case was then proceeding against the other accused Sham Behari Singh, when he filed a petition contending that as the offence under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, bad been compounded and as the case under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act had been withdrawn by the complainant as against Hurnandan Singh, the whole offence under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, had been compounded and the whole Complaint under Section 24 had been with drawn, and he asked that he also should be acquitted.
2. The learned Deputy Magistrate rejected this application, and on an application in revision to the District Magistrate it was held by him that the compounding of the offence under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, with Hurnandan Singh did not affect the other accused. Sham Behari Singh, and that there was no withdrawal of the complaint under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act at all.
3. Against, this order the present application in revision has been made. Different views have been taken by the Courts in India.
4. By the Calcutta High Court; it has been held that the compounding of an offense in regard to one accused is a compounding of the offence in regard to all: Chandra Kumar Das v. Emperor 7 C. W. N. 176, This view has been dissented from by the Madras High Court, but in our opinion the view of the Calcutta High Court is the correct one.
5. So far as the case under Section 24, of the Cattle Trespass Act is concerned, it is clear that the petition which was filed, asking that Hurnandan Singh should be acquitted without hearing, was withdrawal of the complaint so far as it concerned him Section 248 of the Criminal Procedure Code, however, contemplates the withdrawal of the complaint, that is, the complaint as a whole. The complaint in this case was one against both the accused and although only one accused is mentioned in the withdrawal petition, it is a withdrawal of the whole complaint and consequently a withdrawal of the complaint in respect of both accused. The order of the District Magistrate must, therefore, be set aside and the petitioner must be acquitted.
Adami, J.
6. I agree.