Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abhishek Puri vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 December, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA
ON THE 11 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 10367 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ABHISHEK PURI S/O PREM PURI, AGED ABOUT 20
YEARS, STUDENT, R/O BUDHWARA ASHTA POLICE
STATION ASHTA DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI SATYAM AGRAWAL - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION PARVATI DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. RANJANA AGNIHOTRI - DEPUTY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 01.07.2023
delivered in Sessions Trial No.116/2022 by the learned Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Ashta, district Sehore, by which the appellant was convicted
for an offence unishable under section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo
RI for 5 years and fine of Rs.2,000/-, with default stipulation.
2. On 31.10.2023 the parties filed I.A. No.26262/2023 seeking permission
to compound the offence and dispose of the matter on the basis of
compromise.
3 . This Court on 22.11.2023 had directed that the parties shall appear
before the Registrar (J-II) for verification of compromise on the 28.11.2023.
The verification report was received on that date itself, in which it has been
certified that the parties have arrived at a compromise without any threat,
inducement or coercion and the compromise is voluntarily.
4. On the basis of that report, this Court is satisfied that the parties have
arrived at a compromise on their free-will and volition. The appellant was
convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under section 326 of IPC,
which is a non-compoundable offence.
5 . Now, the question that arises for decision is whether permission to
compromise can be granted in a non-compoundable offence of Section 326 of
IPC. On this aspect, the legal position is settled by the decisions of Hon'ble
Supreme Court that inherent powers of Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised
concurrently with the appellate and revisional jurisdiction and that while hearing
the appeal against conviction under an offence which is of non- compoundable
nature, the High Court may not be competent to permit compounding of the
offence, but High Court may quash the proceedings in such cases. For this,
decision in Popular Muthiah Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police
reported in 2006 (7) SC 296 and Shiji @ Pappu & others Vs. Radhika &
anr. reported in (2011) 100 SCC 705 (Criminal Appeal No.2094/2011)
can be referred to.
6. It has also been held in case of Shiji (supra) that the inherent powers
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. have to be exercised with utmost care and caution
and only sparingly for securing the ends of justice. The matter in hand involves
a personal dispute and does not have the dimensions to affect the public
interest. Parties have amicably settled the matter between them. It can be
apprehended that if the dispute is allowed to linger on between them, it would
disturb their harmonious relationship and may become the cause of further rift.
Looking to the nature of dispute, it is deemed appropriate to invoke the inherent
powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. here. Accordingly, the conviction of
appellant under Section 326 of IPC is hereby quashed.
7 . Accordingly, in the light of compromise and under the exercise of
inherent powers, this Court sets aside the impugned judgment of conviction and
sentence so far as it relates to appellant Abhishek Puri and he is acquitted of the
charge of Section 326 of IPC.
8. He is in custody. He be released forthwith.
9. Fine amount, if any, paid by him shall be refunded to him.
10. Accordingly, this criminal appeal stands allowed and disposed of.
11. Let the copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for
necessary compliance.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
ps
Date: 2023.12.12 14:56:19 +05'30'
