Shakti Dutta & Anr v. State

O R D E R %

15.11.2016

¶1The appellants Shakti Dutta and Dheeraj challenge the judgment of conviction dated 18th January, 2016 convicting them for offence punishable under Sections 323/34 IPC and the order on sentence of the even date awarding them sentence 'Till Rising of the Court' and a fine of ₹1000/- each.

¶2The grievance of the appellants who are two in number is limited that as the matter had been settled between the parties and the appellants have been convicted only for offence under Section 323/34 IPC which is a compoundable offence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge ought to have compounded the offence instead of convicting the appellants and awarding them sentence 'Till Rising of the Court'. Before the Trial Court respondent No.2 and 3 who are the complainant and victim though supported the case of CRL.A. 412/2016

the prosecution but also admitted that they have settled the matter with the appellants.

¶3Respondents No.2 and 3 are present in Court and are identified by the investigating officer. They stand by their statement that they have settled the matter with the appellants and thus the offences be compounded against the appellants.

¶4Section 320 (5) Cr.P.C. permits compounding of the offence with the leave of the Court even at the stage of appeal. The trial has already taken place and the roles attributed to each of the accused have been clarified. Since respondent No.2 and 3 have compounded the offence with the appellants and the appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under Section 323/34 IPC only which is a compoundable offence, the offence punishable under Section 323/34 IPC between the parties is compounded. The affect of composition of offence as per Section 320 (8) Cr.P.C. would be acquittal of the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 323/34 IPC.

¶5Appeal is accordingly disposed of setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence.

MUKTA GUPTA, J. NOVEMBER 15, 2016 'ga'

CRL.A. 412/2016

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 412/2016 SHAKTI DUTTA & ANR ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Ashwin Vaish, Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey, Mr. V. Thomus, Advs. versus STATE ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP with SI Umesh Yadav, PS Uttam Nagar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA