Shyam Sunder And Ors vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 3349 Raj

                                         (1 of 3)                       [CRLA-342/2012]


     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
                 S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 342/2012

Shyam Sunder And Ors.
                                                                        ----Appellant
                                    Versus
State of Rajasthan
                                                                    ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Shree Kant Verma
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP
                                Ms. Sumitra Choudhary



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

                                     Order

04/03/2022
     In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its

highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being

maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of

all concerned.

     The   appellant     has      been       convicted           vide   order   dated

29.03.2012 under Sections 325 IPC- 03 years' S.I; U/s. 323 IPC-

06 months' S.I; U/s. 341 IPC- one months' S.I and U/s. 148 IPC-

01 years' S.I.

     Counsel for the appellant submits that in the peculiar

circumstance the parties have arrived at a compromise and the

appeal is required to be closed.

     Counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment of

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajesh Kumar Vs. State of Himachal

Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.1929/2019 (arising out of SLP(CRL.)




                     (Downloaded on 07/03/2022 at 08:26:32 PM)
                                            (2 of 3)                [CRLA-342/2012]


No. 5880/2019) decided on 17.12.2019, relevant portion of which

reads as follows:-

     "We have heard learned counsel for the parties, and taken note of the
     contents of the Compromise Deed duly signed by the injured
     complainant Parveen Kumar and accused Rajesh Kumar and the
     supporting application (Crl. M.P. No. 180793 of 2019) filed by the
     complainant Parveen Kumar. Since the offences are compoundable
     in nature, we consider it appropriate to grant leave to the parties to
     compromise the matter. The appellant has been in custody since 28 th
     May, 2019 for more than six months. Since the parties have
     voluntarily desired to enter into a compromise for sufficient and
     genuine reasons stated in the Deed, we permit compounding of the
     offences."


     "The conviction and sentence is set aside. The appellant who is in
     jail undergoing sentence shall be set free forthwith, if not required in
     any other case. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed
     order."


     Counsel for the appellant has also referred to the judgment

passed by this Court in Inder Kumar & Anr. Vs. State of

Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Appeal No.118/2022) decided on

07.02.2022, relevant portion of which reads as follows:-

            "On the basis of the compromise arrived at between the
     parties, the present appeal is allowed. The accused-appellants are
     acquitted of the offences under Sections 323, 324 and 341 of the IPC.
     Consequently, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence
     dated 13.1.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi in
     Sessions Case no.20/2014 is quashed and set aside.
            The accused-appellants, if in custody, be released forthwith, in
     case they are not required in any other case.
            All the interlocutoary applications including the application
     seeking suspension of sentence stand disposed of accordingly."


     Counsel for the complainant submits that compromise in-

question is acceptable to the respondent.

                       (Downloaded on 07/03/2022 at 08:26:32 PM)
                                                                              (3 of 3)                [CRLA-342/2012]


                                         The present appeal is allowed. The appellants are acquitted

                                   from the offences under Sections 325, 323, 341 & 148 IPC.

                                         Consequently, the impugned judgment dated 29.03.2012

                                   passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1,

                                   Bikaner in Sessions Case no.133/2008 is quashed and set aside.

                                         All the interlocutory applications including the application

                                   preferred for taking the compromise on record are accordingly

                                   disposed of.


                                                                   (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

41-nirmala/Sanjay-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)