(1.) CR .M.P. No. 28/2006 came up for consideration before the Court on 05.05.2009. In the application, the appellant prayed that the Compromise deed enclosed with the said application may be taken on record of the file and appeal be disposed of, accordingly. This court on 05.05.2009 ordered that without commenting on the merits of the application, the parties to compromise would appear before the Registrar Judicial for getting their statement recorded after proper verification. The note of the Registry is that the statement of complainant Kalu Ram, injured persons Romesh Chander, Som Dutt and Vishwa Nath have been recorded. Statement of the appellant has also been recorded. Statement of the parties have been placed on record of the appeal file.
(2.) IN the compromise deed, it has been stated that on the intervention of elders of the community in order to have reconciliation and to restore amicable relations between the parties on the policy of forget and forgive, they have entered into compromise. The compromise deed also reveals that one other reason for entering into the compromise is that the father of the second party expired during the trial. It is specifically pleaded that no other influence has been exerted in reaching the compromise except the good intention to restore the previous normal relations between parties. It is further stated that parties are closely related to each other.
(3.) THE appellant was charged for committing offence under section 307 RPC read with section 3/25 Indian Arms Act. On conclusion of the trial, appellant has been convicted by the learned Trial Judge for having committed offence under section 307 RPC by his judgment dated 31.10.2002, and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.30,000/ - has also been imposed. In default of payment of fine, it was provided that the appellant shall undergo further simple imprisonment for six months.