Babasaheb S/O Diwaji Gaikwad And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 2085 Bom

                                       (1)
                                                    930 criappln-2817.2021.odt

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

        930 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2817 OF 2021
   IN APEAL/657/2014 WITH APEAL/739/2014 WITH APEAL/
                        657/2014

                BALU @BALASAHEB RAOJI BANSODE
                            VERSUS
              BABASAHEB DIPAJI GAIKWAD AND OTHERS
                                        ...
          Mr. H.D. Deshmukh, Advocate for the applicant.
        Mr. R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for respondent No. 4 - State.
                                   ...

                           CORAM : V.K. JADHAV AND
                                   SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

                           DATE   :   01-03-2022.


 ORDER :

1. The applicant - original complainant is seeking

compounding of the offences post conviction.

2. It appears that the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Ahmednagar by judgment and order dated 30.10.2014

in Sessions Case No. 59/2009 has convicted accused No.1

Babasaheb Gaikwad for the offences punishable under

Sections 307, 326, 323 of I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer

rigorous imprisonment for fve years and to pay fne of Rs.

5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for fve

months. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted

accused No. 1 Babasaheb, accused No.2 Pravin and accused

930 criappln-2817.2021.odt

No. 3 Bhimrao for the offences punishable under Sections

324, 323 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and sentenced them to

suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay

fne of Rs. 2000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for

two months. Further, the learned Additional Sessions Judge

has convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offence punishable

under Section 504 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and

sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six

months each. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also

convicted the accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offence punishable

under Section 506 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and

sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year

each. It is necessary to mention here that so far as accused

No. 3 Bhimrao is concerned, by order dated 30.10.2015 in

Special Leave to Appeal No. 17367/2015, the Supreme Court

has stayed conviction of the appellant Bhimrao.

3. So far as the conviction under Sections 307, 326 of

I.P.C. of accused No.1 Babasaheb is concerned, those offences

are not compoundable. Further, so far as the conviction of

accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections

324, 323 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. is concerned, in terms

of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2005

(Clause 28) table appended to sub-section (2) of Section 320

930 criappln-2817.2021.odt

of the Code is amended so as to make the offence under

Section 324 of I.P.C. a non-compoundable offence.

4. So far as the compounding of the offences and

quashing of conviction sought on the basis of settlement, the

settlement post-conviction can be considered while disposing

of the criminal appeal preferred against the judgment and

order of conviction, as a mitigating circumstance.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant seeks

time to go through the amendment and also the settled

position as to whether the settlement post conviction can be

considered as a mitigating circumstance and nothing more

than that. Learned Counsel, thus, seeks time to make

appropriate submissions on these two points.

6. Stand over to 15.03.2022.

(SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) (V.K. JADHAV, J.)

VD_Dhirde