Mandira Devi And Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others

Sureshwar Thakur, J

The accused/convicts, the revisionists herein, became concurrently convicted for the charges drawn against them, respectively under Sections 451, 504, read with Section 34 of the IPC. Moreover, the accused/convicts Mandira Devi, and, Mustak Singh, were also found guilty for the offence drawn under Section 323 of the IPC.

In pursuance to the accused becoming respectively convicted by the learned trial Court, vis­a­vis, offences (supra), the learned trial Court, through an order, made on 18.6.2014, sentenced each of the accused/convicts, in the hereinafter extracted manner:­

"I have heard learned APP and counsel for convicts. The convicts have committed the offence by taking the law into their own hands. But considering the facts that convict Mandira Devi is 59 years of age, convict Mustak is 74 years of age whereas convict Nirmala Devi is 37 years of age and convict Vikram is of 36 years of age and they are first offender who have taken the law into their own hands in order to protect the joint land qua which the stay order was passed and they are facing trial since the year 2009, a linient view is taken and accordingly, convict Mandira Devi, Mustak, VikranSingh and Nirmala Devi who have committed the offence under Section 451 of IPC are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court and also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 300/­ each, the convicts shall further undergo simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court and directed to pay a fine of Rs. 300/­ each for the commission of offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC. whereas, the convicts namely Mandira Devi and Mustak Singh who have committed the offence under Section 323 of IPC are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court and directed to pay a fine of Rs.500/­ each. In default of payment of fine, they shall further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days."

As afore stated, the afore made order(s) of conviction, and, sentence, rendered upon each of the accused/convicts, hence by the learned trial Court became affirmed by the learned First Appellate Court, through a verdict, recorded on 19.7.2016, by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, H.P., upon, Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2014.

The accused/convicts assailed, the afore concurrently made verdicts of conviction, and, sentence upon each of them, through theirs instituting Criminal Revision No. 299 of 2016, before this Court.

During the pendency of the instant criminal revision petition before this Court, one Purshottam Dutt has made the hereinafter extracted statement:­

"Stated that I have entered into a compromise with the accused/convicts. The accused/convicts are my neighborers and to maintain cordiality and amity with them in future, I pray this Court that the charged offences, constituted under Sections 451, 323, 504 read with Section 34 IPC be compounded. I also pray that Cr. Revision 299 of 2016 be allowed by this Court and the accused/convicts be acquitted from the afore charged offences.

The offences in respect whereof the afore concurrently made verdicts have been made by both the learned courts below, are, compoundable, with the leave of the Court. Therefore, given the afore extracted statement, made on oath, before this Court by the complainant/informant, this Court proceeds to compound the charged offences. Consequently, after compounding the afore charged offences, drawn against each of the accused, this Court proceeds to accept Criminal Revision Petition No. 299 of 2016. Moreover, this Court also proceeds to acquit the accused/convicts of the charged offences. The surety bonds are cancelled and discharged. All pending applications, if any also stand disposed. Records be sent back forthwith.