RAMESH v. STATE OF M.P. & ORS.

Supreme Court of India · 03 Nov 2008
C.K. THAKKAR; D.K. JAIN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1725 OF 2008
criminal sentence_modified Significant

AI Summary

The Supreme Court held that while offences under Section 307 IPC are non-compoundable, a compromise between parties may justify maintaining conviction but modifying the sentence already undergone.

Full Text
Translation output
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1725 OF 2008
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3874 of 2007)
RAMESH .. APPELLANT vs.
STATE OF M.P. & ORS. .. RESPONDENTS
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1726&1728 OF 2008
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 4152&4072 of 2007)
Leave granted.
Learned counsel for the parties stated that the matters have been compromised between the parties and the compromise deed is placed on record.
The case related to an incident of 1998 but the conviction was under
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Under Sec. 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure 1973, an offence punishable under Sec. 307 is not compoundable.
In the light of the statutory provisions we are of the view that though no compounding of offence can be allowed, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the light of the compromise deed, in our opinion, ends of justice would be met if the conviction is maintained but sentence already undergone by the accused is treated as adequate and sufficient.
The Criminal Appeals are disposed of accordingly. ................J.
(C.K. THAKKAR) ...................J.
(D.K. JAIN)
New Delhi, November 3, 2008.
JUDGMENT