Full Judgment
Parihar, J.
1. On a complaint been filed by the petitioner, a charge sheet for offence under Section 406/34 IPC was filed against three persons namely Chhiman, Harkesh and Smt. Kalli. After completion of the trial, the trial court convicted the accused persons under Section 406 IPC. Aggrieved by the order of conviction, the accused preferred an appeal before the appellate court. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner filed an application for compounding the offence under which the accused were convicted. On the basis of a compromise between the parties. The appellate court vide order dated 10.5.2000 dismissed the application. Hence, the present petition challenging the order dated 10.5.2000.
2. After hearing counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record.
3. Though at times the offences provided under provisions of Indian Penal Code may not be compoundable, however, each case have to be seen on its own facts. There has been a consistent approach of not only this Court but the Supreme Court also that to seek the ends of justice and minimise the litigation between the parties, the Court may, under peculiar circumstances, grant permission to compound the offence to end the litigation.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to direct the appellate court to permit the parties to compound the offence alleged in the present case so that the unhappy litigation between the parties come to an end. The appellate court is directed to varify the compromise between the parties and after ascertaining the same, pass necessary orders for compounding the matter and dropping the further proceedings in the present case. The petition is disposed of accordingly. The record of the trial court be sent back immediately.