Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajaram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 June, 2023

Author: Sunita Yadav

Bench: Sunita Yadav

                                                           1
                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                              AT GWALIOR
                                                      BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                                                ON THE 16 th OF JUNE, 2023
                                          CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2391 of 2020

                           BETWEEN:-
                           1.    RAJARAM S/O SHYAMLAL, AGED ABOUT 60
                                 YEARS, R/O KALAR MANDIR KE PAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    DHARMENDRA S/O RAJARAM, AGED ABOUT 26
                                 YEARS, R/O KALAR MANDIR KE PAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    HARICHARAN S/O RAJARAM, AGED ABOUT 28
                                 YEARS, R/O KALAR MANDIR KE PAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           4.    SOURABH S/O RAJARAM, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
                                 R / O KALAR MANDIR KE PAS (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....PETITIONERS
                           (BY SHRI VIBHOR KUMAR SAHU- ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE
                           STATION CANTT, DISTRICT GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....RESPONDENT
                           (SHRI DINESH SAVITA- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE STATE AND
                           SHRI DHARAMVIR SINGH PARIHAR- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                           COMPLAINANT)

                                 This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                            ORDER

The present Criminal Revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 o f Cr.P.C. has been filed against the impugned judgment of conviction and Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 16-06-2023 05:42:45 PM 2 order of sentence dated 16.12.2020 passed by Seventh Additional Sessions Guna, District Guna (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No.87/2016, partly confirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04/02/2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna, District Guna (M.P.) in Criminal Case No.1587/2011, convicting the petitioners under Section 323/149 of IPC and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for three months with fine of Rs.500/-, under Section 325/149 of IPC sentencing them to undergo R.I. for six months with fine of Rs.500/- under Section 148 of IPC sentencing them to undergo R.I. for three months with fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulations.

During pendency of this Criminal Revision, the petitioners and the respondent/complainant have filed the applications which are I.A.No.14977/2022 and I.A.No.14978/2022 seeking permission of this Court to dispose of the matter on the basis of compromise. In support of aforesaid applications, affidavits have also been filed on behalf of petitioners as well as respondent/complainant. Counsel for both the parties submit that b o th the parties have entered into compromise according to their own volition and without there being any pressure.

On 13.04.2023, the parties were directed to appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court for verification of factum of compromise. In compliance of the said order, the Registry has filed its report. As per the provision of Section 320 of Cr.P.C., the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323 & 325 of IPC are compoundable and the offence punishable under Section 149 of IPC is non-compoundable.

Consequent upon the above said facts and that the petitioners and the complainant have amicably resolved the issue, this Court by invoking the inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. allows the applications.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 16-06-2023 05:42:45 PM 3

In view of the above, I.A.No.14977/2022 & I.A.No.14978/2022 are disposed of.

Consequently, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.12.2020 passed by Seventh Additional Sessions Guna, District Guna (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No.87/2016 as well as the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04/02/2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna, District Guna (M.P.) in Criminal Case No.1587/2011 are hereby quashed.

Petitioners are acquitted of the charge levelled against them. Their bail bonds stand discharged.

Consequently, Criminal Revision stands disposed of.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE vpn Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 16-06-2023 05:42:45 PM