Bombay High Court
Hemraj S/O. Bhagwan Warghane (In ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso ... on 8 March, 2022
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
(1) 38.revn.104.2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.104 OF 2019
Hemraj s/o Bhagwan Warghane
Vs.
State of Maharashtra through PSO Police Station, Chandrapur,
District Chandrapur and another
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A. C. Jaltare, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. H. D. Dubey, APP for non-applicant no.1.
Mr. R. P. Masurkar, Advocate for non-applicant no.2.
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 08/03/2022
Criminal Application (APPR) No.83 of 2020
1. Heard Mr. Jaltare, learned counsel for the
applicant and Mr. Masurkar learned counsel for the
non-applicant no.2.
2. Criminal Application (APPR) No.83 of 2020
filed by the applicant/complainant Madhuri d/o Uddhao
Pazare, under Section 301 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, seeks permission to assist the prosecution, to
which Mr. Jaltare, learned counsel for the applicant has
no objection, considering which, the application is
allowed.
3. The applicant namely, Madhuri d/o Uddhao
Pazare be added as a party non-applicant No.2, to the
memo of revision forthwith.
(2) 38.revn.104.2019
4. The criminal application is disposed of.
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION 104 OF 2019
1. Mr. Masurkar, learned counsel for the
non-applicant No.2 has filed a Pursis Stamp No.7 of 2022
dated 28.02.2022 along with the affidavit of the
non-applicant No.2 stating that the dispute between her
and the applicant/accused has been amicably settled and
she has received a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards full and
final settlement of the dispute. Mr. Masurkar, learned
counsel for the non-applicant No.2, therefore submits,
that the non-applicant No.2 has no objection, if the
matter is permitted to be compounded.
2. By the Judgment dated 27.08.2015, the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class has convicted the
applicant/accused for the offence punishable under
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "the
IPC") and has sentenced rigorous imprisonment for 3
years and fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine,
simple imprisonment for one month. This conviction, has
been maintained by the learned Sessions Court in Appeal
No.93 of 2015, which came to be dismissed on
02.05.2019, both of which are challenged before this
Court by way of the present revision.
3. Mr. Jaltare, learned counsel for the applicant
submits, that under the provisions of Section 320(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Cr.P.C."),
(3) 38.revn.104.2019
the offence under Section 420 of the IPC is
compoundable by the person who is cheated, which in,
the present case is the non-applicant No.2, who has given
her consent for compounding of the offence. He
therefore submits, that the same is required to be so
done.
4. The Full Bench of this Court in Maya Sanjay
Khandare and another Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2021
DGLS (Bom.) 34 has held that ordinarily the contention,
that the convict and the informant/complainant have
entered into compromised after the judgment of
conviction, can be raised only before the
Appellate/Revisional Court in the proceedings,
challenging such conviction and it would be sound
exercise of this discretion under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C
to refuse to quash criminal proceedings post-conviction
for a non-compoundable offence only on the ground that
the parties have entered into compromise, considering
which, since the offence under Section 420 of the IPC is
compoundable offence, the same can be permitted to be
compounded at the behest of the victim / person
cheated. Considering that, the non-applicant No.2, has
expressed her settlement and Mr. Masurkar, learned
counsel for the non-applicant No.2, on instructions,
makes a statement that the offence be compounded,
which is accepted, the offence committed by the
applicant under Section 420 of the IPC is hereby
compounded and the conviction of the applicant by the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class by the judgment
(4) 38.revn.104.2019
dated 27.08.2015 and its confirmation by the learned
Sessions Court by the judgment dated 02.05.2019 is
accordingly quashed and set aside.
5. The criminal revision application is disposed
of, in view of the above. No costs.
6. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
JUDGE
Sarkate.
Digitally signed byANANT R
SARKATE
Signing Date:09.03.2022
14:58
