Khalafat Mian @ Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2526 Jhar

                                1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      I.A. No.4774 of 2022
                                   In
                 Cr. Revision No. 614 of 2004
1. Khalafat Mian @ Ansari
2. Kalam Mian @ Ansari
3. Masum Mian @ Md. Jalil Ansari                 ..... Petitioners
                            Versus
The State of Jharkhand                  .....    Opposite Party
                            ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Aishwarya Prakash, Advocate For the Opp. Party-State : Mr. B.N. Ojha, APP For the Informant : Mr. Aman Shekhar, Advocate

--------

07/ 08.07.2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant criminal revision application is directed

against the judgment dated 13.02.2004, passed by learned 2 nd

Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka, whereby the Cr. Appeal No.

205 of 1989, preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

05.07.1989, in G.R. No. 451 of 1985/ T.R. No.837 of 1989,

passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dumka,

whereby the petitioner No.1 was convicted and sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for six months and one month

respectively under Sections 324 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code

and petitioner Nos. 2 & 3 were both convicted and sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for two months each and 1 month

each respectively under Sections 323 and 147 IPC, has been

affirmed.

3. Mr. Aishwarya Prakash, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Aman Shekhar, learned counsel for the

opposite party-informant submits that a joint compromise petition

has been filed before this Court with a prayer to accept the same

as both the parties have arrived at a compromise.

Learned counsel for the parties draws attention of this

Court towards paragraph No.5 of the interlocutory application

No. 4774 of 2022 and submit that the informant would be happy

if the petitioners are acquitted and discharged from the charges

under Section 324/147 IPC and under Section 323 IPC,

respectively and the informant does not want to proceed with the

matter and now they are living happily and peacefully. Learned

counsels further submit that the disputes were personal in nature

and the petitioners are not habitual offenders.

4. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of the

joint compromise petition the case can be disposed of.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the

case and the averments made in the interlocutory application

No.4774 of 2022 which has been filed in the form of joint

compromise petition between the informant / prosecution party

and the petitioners indicating therein that both the parties have

compromised with each other. Further, both the parties do not

want to proceed with the matter and since the dispute between the

parties were personal in nature and not against any public policy,

this Court accepts the joint compromise petition for the ends of

justice.

6. Consequently, the judgment dated 13.02.2004, passed

by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka and judgment

of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.07.1989, in G.R. No.

451 of 1985/ T.R. No.837 of 1989, passed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate 1st Class, Dumka is hereby, quashed and set aside.

7. The instant application is allowed. I.A., if any, stands

disposed of.

8. The petitioners shall be discharged from the liability of

their bail bonds.

9. Let the copy of this order be communicated to the

court below.

10. Let the lower court records be sent back to the court

concerned forthwith.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Pramanik/