Full Judgment Text
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2022 OF 2012
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.7070 OF 2012)
SURAT SINGH APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL (NOW UTTARAKHAND) RESPONDENTS
& ANR.
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal, by special leave, is filed
against the judgment and order passed by the
High Court of Judicature of Uttarakhand at
Nanital in Criminal Revision No. 161 of 2004,
dated 23.03.2012. The accused person,
JUDGMENT
revisionist therein, is before us in this
appeal.
3. In the instant case, Respondent no. 2,
Km. Purni Devi had filed an F.I.R. against the
appellant for outraging her modesty. After due
investigation, charge-sheet was filed against
the appellant for offences punishable under
Page 1
2
Sections 323, 354 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 (the “IPC” for short).
4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Tehri-Garhwal in Criminal Case No. 921 of 2002,
vide judgment and order dated 07.04.2003, has
convicted the appellant under Sections 354 and
506 of the IPC and sentenced him to rigorous
imprisonment of one year with fine and rigorous
imprisonment of six months, respectively.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant
had unsuccessfully appealed before the learned
Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Criminal
Appeal No. 5 of 2003. The said appeal was
rejected and the judgment and order passed by
JUDGMENT
the learned Magistrate was upheld, vide
judgment and order dated 14.09.2003. The
appellant, against the aforesaid order and
judgment, preferred Revision Petition No. 161
of 2004 before the High Court, wherein the High
Court, vide the impugned judgment and order
dated 23.03.2012, has dismissed it. The
appellant questions the correctness or
Page 2
3
otherwise of the impugned judgment and order in
this appeal.
5. During the pendency of this appeal, we
are informed by the learned counsel appearing
for the parties that the parties, namely, the
appellant-accused and respondent no. 2 have
entered into a compromise and, accordingly,
respondent no. 2 has filed an affidavit before
this Court. The contents and terms of the said
compromise are reproduced hereinbelow:
“I, Km. Purni Devi, daughter of Shri Dhir
Singh, R/o. Village Rampur Patti Kunjani,
P.S. Chamba, District Tihri-Garhwal,
presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly
affirms under oath as following :
JUDGMENT
1.
That I am the informant in FIR No.31/98,
dated 29.10.98 U/s.354, 323, 506 IPC
P.S.Chamba, Distt. Tihri-Garhwal, lodged
against Surat Singh, S/o. Kamand Singh,
R/o. Village Rampur, Patti-Kunjani, Tehsil
Narendra Nagar, District Tehri-Garhwal,
Uttarakhand.
Page 3
4
2.
That on the basis of aforesaid FIR dated
29.10.98 lodged by me against the
aforesaid Surat Singh, S/o.Kamand Singh,
who is my neighbour was put in trial and
was convicted by Chief Judicial Magistrate
Tihri Garhwal, New Tihri for the offences
U/ss.354, 506 IPC and was awarded maximum
sentence of 1 year R.I., Rs.1000/- fine by
judgment and order dated 7.4.2003 passed
in Criminal Case No.921/02. Appeal filed
against the same was also dismissed by the
Sessions Court and the High Court by
judgment and order dated 23.3.2012 has
dismissed the Revision filed by the
aforesaid Surat Singh and affirmed the
order of conviction passed by the trial
Court.
JUDGMENT
3.
That the aforesaid Surat Singh, S/o.
Kamand Singh is my neighbour and his house
is just adjacent to my house and we are
living in the same village. Earlier there
was old enmity of aforesaid Surat Singh
with my father Shri Dhir Singh. The
incident in relation to which I lodged FIR
against the aforesaid Surat Singh is of
the year 1998 and is quite old and
Page 4
5
continuation of dispute on the basis of
said old incident, will only increase
bitterness in my life. Hence myself and
my family has decided to resolve all our
dispute with the aforesaid Surat Singh,
S/o. Kamand Singh so that no bitterness
can be left in the environment of our
village and we can set an example to live
in peace and harmony by resolving all our
disputes.
4.
That I have entered into compromise with
aforesaid Surat Singh and resolved all my
disputes with him in a harmonious manner
so that people of our village can live in
peace and harmony and bitterness be left
between us and our families.
5.
JUDGMENT
That the family members of aforesaid Surat
Singh informed me that he is in jail
pursuant to the order of conviction
affirmed by the High Court and observing
the sentence awarded. I wish that in the
present matter our dispute may be settled
in an amicable manner and we should set
example for other persons of our village
to resolve the dispute in a peaceful
manner. I hereby affirm that I have no
Page 5
6
grievance left against the aforesaid Surat
Singh, S/o. Kamand Singh and want to the
controversy involved between me and
aforesaid Surat Singh, to come to an end
so that we can live in peace and harmony
as good neighbours.”
6. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties and, in particular, the learned counsel
appearing for respondent no. 2. He submits
that he has compromised the lis with the
appellant at her own will. In view of the
above, while disposing of this appeal, we
accord permission to compound the offences and
the effect of this would be the acquittal of
the accused with the offences he is charged
JUDGMENT
with.
Ordered accordingly.
.......................J.
(H.L. DATTU)
.......................J.
(CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD)
NEW DELHI;
Page 6
7
DECEMBER 10, 2012.
JUDGMENT
Page 7