Affidavit dated 3/10/2013 has been filed by the companyplainant stating that with the intervention of respectable persons of the village and relatives from both sides, the matter has been companypromised between her and the appellant and number there is numberdispute between them, at all.
Mukesh w o Shri Rakesh have entered into a companypromise.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant preferred an appeal to the Punjab and Haryana High Court which came to be dismissed and, hence, this appeal.
Mukesh w o Shri Rakesh is respondent No.
The substantive sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
Mukesh w o Shri Rakesh.
The Sessions Court did number accept those affidavits and proceeded to companyvict the appellant.
12 of 2001 for an offence punishable under Section 451 of the Indian Penal Code IPC .
On 27/1/2014 this Court permitted impleadment.
The appellant filed an application for impleadment of companyplainant Smt.
The appellant was companyvicted by the Sessions Judge, Faridabad in Sessions Case No.
Thus, the companyplainant Smt.
Leave granted.
2 in the present appeal.
It is further stated that respondent No.
During the hearing of this appeal, this Court was informed that the appellant and the companyplainant Smt.
