1 2025:CGHC:10427 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 209 of 2007 1. Arjun, S/o Lamdhar, aged about 45 years, R/o Village Biringpal, P.S. Parpa, District Bastar (C.G.) 2. Sahadev, S/o Lamdhar, aged about 32 years, R/o Village Biringpal, P.S. Parpa, District Bastar (C.G.) 3. Vijay, S/o Arjun, aged about 21 years, R/o Village Biringpal, P.S. Parpa, District Bastar (C.G.) ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh, through District Magistrate Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellants : Mr. Akash Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. HAPS Bhatia, Panel Lawyer For Complainant : Mr. Sahdev Yadav, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 03/03/2025 1. This appeal arises out of impugned judgment dated 21.02.2007 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, Bastar place Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh, in Session Case No.262/2006 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the Appellants for offence punishable under Section 325/34 of IPC and sentenced them RI for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation. 2. Appellant no.2 Sahadev and complainant of the case Bhaluram Mandavi are present before this Court through their respective Counsels and submit that at this stage they have filed IA No. 1/2025 for compounding U/s 320(2) Cr.P.C. r/w Section 359 of BNSS 2023 supported with affidavit of Appellant Sahdev, IA No.2/2025 for leave of Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.03.05 10:34:51 +0530 2 the Hon’ble Court for compounding U/s 320(5) Cr.P.C. r/w Section 359(5) of BNSS 2023 supported with affidavit of Appellant Sahdev and earlier filed affidavit of complainant Bhaluram Mandavi dated 03.02.2025 and seeking permission to compound the offence and further to dispose of the appeal by acquitting the appellants. 3. Heard complainant/victim Bhaluram Mandavi on I.A.No.01/2025 and IA No.02/2025 which are duly supported by the affidavits of appellant Sahadev, has stated that a settlement has been reached between him and the appellants, hence the appellants may be acquitted. 4. The incident is of the year 2006. The appellants have been convicted by the Trial Court for offence punishable under Section 325/34 of the IPC, the said offence is a compoundable offence. Complainant Bhaluram Mandavi S/o Dashru Ram has voluntarily given affidavit for compromise wherein he has stated that he does not want to further prosecute the appellants and wants to acquit them on the basis of compromise arrived between them. Therefore, permission is granted to compound the offence u/s Sections 325/34 IPC by way of these compromise applications. The Appellants are acquitted of the offences under Sections 325/34 of IPC. Accordingly, the applications for compromise are allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise applications. If any amount of fine deposited by the appellants, shall be refunded to them. 6. The appellants are on bail. They are not required to again surrender in this case. However, their bail bond(s) shall remain in force for a period of six months in view of the provisions contained in Section 437-A of CrPC. 7. Let a certified copy of this judgment along-with the original record be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for information and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham