S. No.337 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CRA-S-45-SB of 2006 (O&M) Date of Decision:25.04.2025 Sudarshan and others .....Appellants Vs. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Tarun Yadav, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral) The four appellants, namely, Sudarshan, Ram Niwas, Rameshwar and Sujan were convicted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 16.12.2005 under Sec/ons 447/34 and 323/34 IPC. In addi/on, Sujan was also convicted under Sec/ons 506 and 436 IPC. 2. Vide order of sentence dated 19.12.2005, all four of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months along with fine of `500/- and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days for commi8ng offence under Sec/on 447/34 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for commi8ng offence under Sec/on 323/34 IPC along with fine of `1,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. In addi/on, Sujan was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for commi8ng offence under Sec/on 506 IPC along with fine of `1,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 days and he was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years for commi8ng offence under Sec/on 436 IPC along with fine of `3,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous RENU 2025.04.25 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRA-S-45-SB of 2006 (O&M) -2- imprisonment for one month. All the substan/ve sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. Against the afore-said convic/on, the present appeal was filed. 4. Later on, an applica/on bearing CRM No.14090 of 2017 was moved under Sec/on 320 read with Sec/on 482 Cr.P.C to allow the appellants to compound the offences inasmuch par/es had se=led their grievances and reached the compromise so as to maintain peace, harmony and cordial rela/ons in future. Copy of the compromise Annexure A.1 was placed on record which is duly signed by the injured-complainant, namely, Om Parkash, Promila and Santra. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the occurrence had taken place wayback in August, 2000. At the /me of convic/on, the four appellants- convicts were in the age group of 35 to 50 years and by now, all of them are above 60 years. 6. Learned State Counsel has no serious objec/on so as to allow the applica/on bearing CRM No.14090 of 2017. 7. Having regard to the totality of the circumstances, par/cularly the advanced age of the appellants and the fact that more than 20 years have passed since date of recording the convic/on, I allow the applica/on bearing CRM No.14090 of 2017 and permit the applicants- appellants to compound the offence with the injured party. 8. Consequent to the above, present appeal i.e. CRA-S-45-SB of 2006 is accepted by se8ng aside the convic/on and sentence as compounding of the offence will tantamount to acqui=al of the accused under Sec/on 359(8) of BNSS (old Sec/on 320(8) Cr.P.C.). April 25, 2025 ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RENU 2025.04.25 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh