Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ashok Kumar Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Ashok Kumar vs The State of Rajasthan

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Apr 04, 1977
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/766576

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 108 of 1977
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code - Section 320--Permission to compound--Promotion of healthy relations between parties--Permission to compound offence granted.;Appeal Allowed - - The learned Public Prosecutor endorsed no objection on it.

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ashok Kumar

Respondent

The State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In
1977WLN138

Excerpt

criminal procedure code - section 320--permission to compound--promotion of healthy relations between parties--permission to compound offence granted.;appeal allowed - - the learned public prosecutor endorsed no objection on it.p.d. kudal, j.1. accused-appellant ashok kumar has filed this appeal against the judgment of the learned additional sessions judge, ajmer dated january 19, 1977.2. the learned counsel for the accused-appellant was heard, and the appeal has been admitted for hearing.3. the learned counsel for the accused-appellant has presented an application for compromise under section 320, cr. p.c. 1973, the injured kamlesh gupta and her father appeared before the court and prayed that the compromise prayed for may be allowed.4. notice of this application was given to the learned public prosecutor. he states that the state has no objection if the permission to compound the offence is granted. in the compromise petition it has been contended that with a view to promote healthy relations. between the parties and their family members it would be in the interests of justice if the permission to compound the offence is given.5. i have carefully perused the judgment and considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the accused-appellant and the learned public prosecutor.6. it appears expedient in the interest of justice looking to the facts and circumstances of the case that the permission to compound the offence be granted. the permission is accordingly granted.7. the learned counsel for the accused-appellant shri amrit kumar, the injured kamlesh gupta and her father gauri shanker gupta verified the composition deed and the application under section 320, cr. p.c. the learned public prosecutor endorsed no objection on it. both these may be kept on record.8. in this view of the matter, the appeal filed by the accused-appellant is hereby allowed, and the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant are accordingly set aside.

Full Judgment

P.D. Kudal, J.

1. Accused-appellant Ashok Kumar has filed this appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ajmer dated January 19, 1977.

2. The learned Counsel for the accused-appellant was heard, and the appeal has been admitted for hearing.

3. The learned Counsel for the accused-appellant has presented an application for compromise under Section 320, Cr. P.C. 1973, The injured Kamlesh Gupta and her father appeared before the Court and prayed that the compromise prayed for may be allowed.

4. Notice of this application was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. He states that the State has no objection if the permission to compound the offence is granted. In the compromise petition it has been contended that with a view to promote healthy relations. between the parties and their family members it would be in the interests of justice if the permission to compound the offence is given.

5. I have carefully perused the judgment and considered the contentions of the learned Counsel for the accused-appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. It appears expedient in the interest of justice looking to the facts and circumstances of the case that the permission to compound the offence be granted. The permission is accordingly granted.

7. The learned Counsel for the accused-appellant Shri Amrit Kumar, the injured Kamlesh Gupta and her father Gauri Shanker Gupta verified the composition deed and the application under Section 320, Cr. P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor endorsed no objection on it. Both these may be kept on record.

8. In this view of the matter, the appeal filed by the accused-appellant is hereby allowed, and the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant are accordingly set aside.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial