A single judge bench of the Justice Umesh A. Trivedi of Gujarat HC allowed the revision petition and acquitted the accused in view of the fact that the dispute is personal in nature and both the parties have reached on an amicable settlement.
Additionally, the court denied to order the amount already deposited in view of the fact that this settlement was arrived at revisional stage.
Facts:
This Criminal Revision Application is preferred by the petitioners – accused Nos.1 and 3, challenging their judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the 05th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand, dated 16.05.2017 rendered in Criminal Case No.41 of 2015, whereby both the petitioners – accused came to be convicted for an offence under Sections 323 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) and ordered to undergo 06 months’ simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they were ordered to further undergo 1 month’s simple imprisonment. Over and above that, both the petitioners – accused were convicted for an offence under Sections 325 read with 114 of “IPC” and ordered to undergo 01 month’s simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they were ordered to undergo further a month’s simple imprisonment.
The revision application is filed against both the judgment and order, by the petitioners - accused; however, during the pendency of this Revision Application, it is reported that matter is settled between the parties.
Observations of the Court
The court after verifying and ascertaining from the first informant who is present before the Court, concluded that the settlement arrived at between the parties is voluntary in nature and they are residing in very same village. The offence committed is personal in nature. Considering the injuries caused by kick and fist blows, the permission to compound the offence as required under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Code”), of the Court was granted.
In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence imposed by the 05th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand dated 16.05.2017 in Criminal Case No.41 of 2015 and judgment and order passed by the Appellate Court being 02nd Additional Sessions Judge, dated 09.04.2018 in Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2017, whereby sentence is modified, both was quashed and set aside. However, the court refused to refund the amount already deposited in view of the fact that settlement happened between the parties at revision stage.
Decision:
The present revision petition is allowed by the court and in view of sub-section (8) of Section 320 of “the Code”, the accused are hereby ordered to be acquitted of the charge order passed by the Appellate Court being 02nd Additional Sessions Judge, dated 09.04.2018 in Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2017, whereby sentence is modified, both was quashed and set aside.
Case: DIKSHIT @ BATTI HARSHADBHAI THAKAR & 1 other(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
Citation: R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 384 of 2018
Coram: JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
Dated: 10.11.2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com:
Picture Source :
