Morla Mahidhar, vs Seelam Sudhakar Reddy,
2023 Latest Caselaw 833 AP

         THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI

                     I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2023
                            in/and
              Crl.R.C.Nos.445, 446 & 447 of 2021



COMMON ORDER:


      These three Criminal Revision Cases, under Sections 397 and

401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ('the CrPC', for short)

are filed assailing the judgment, dated 28.06.2019, passed in

Criminal Appeal Nos.344 of 2017, 346 of 2017 and 345 of 2017 on

the file of the Court of the learned XV Additional District & Sessions

Judge, Nuzvid, whereby, the said learned Additional Sessions Judge,

while dismissing the said appeals confirmed the conviction recorded

and   sentence    imposed    against   the   petitioner/accused,   vide

judgment, dated 18.09.2017, in C.C.Nos.153 of 2016, 66 of 2016

and judgment, dated 15.09.2017, passed in C.C.No.133 of 2016

respectively rendered by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate,

Mylavaram.


2.    Pending these revision cases, the petitioner/accused moved

I.A.No.1 of 2023 under Section 320(2) CrPC seeking permission of

the Court to compound the offence as the parties entered into

compromise.      The petitioner further filed I.A.No.2 of 2023 under

Section 320(6) CrPC seeking permission to compound the offence
                                    2
                                                                          BSB, J
                                             Crl.R.C.Nos.445, 446 & 447 of 2021

and consequently allow the criminal revision cases, set aside the

judgments of the Court below, whereby the judgments of the trial

Court in C.C.Nos.153 of 2016, 66 of 2016 & 133 of 2016 are

confirmed; and to acquit the petitioner-accused.


3.    When the revisions are taken up, the petitioner/appellant/

accused and the 1st respondent-complainant are present before this

Court. They produced copies of Aadhar cards in proof of their

respective identity. They are also identified by their respective

counsel. When examined, they stated that they amicably settled the

matter and that in pursuance of the settlement entered into

between the parties, the petitioner/accused agreed to return

Rs.4,00,000/- to the respondent/complainant each in C.C.Nos.153

of 2016, 66 of 2016 and 133 of 2016 respectively and, in turn, the

complainant undertook to withdraw the cases filed by him against

the petitioner/accused and that the terms of compromise are

reduced into writing in the form of joint memo, which is signed by

the parties and their counsel. They asserted the terms of the

compromise and stated that they have voluntarily and willingly

entered into compromise without any force or pressure from any

quarter. The Joint Memorandum of compromise, dated 21.11.2022,

is filed along with I.A.No.2 of 2023 in all these revisions.

BSB, J Crl.R.C.Nos.445, 446 & 447 of 2021

4. Both parties also filed an additional memo stating that they

are facing financial crisis and requested to reduce the amount

payable to the Legal Services Authority, as laid down in the decision

in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal1. As such, they are

directed to pay Rs.5,000/- in each case to the A.P State Legal

Services Authority, Amaravati. Accordingly, they paid a sum of

Rs.5,000/- in each of these revisions, vide demand draft bearing

Nos.443384, 443385, 443386, dated 13.02.2023, respectively.

5. In the above circumstances, I.A.Nos.1 & 2 of 2023 filed in all

these revisions are allowed, and the petitioner-accused and the 1 st

respondent-complainant are permitted to compound the offence.

Consequently, all these Criminal Revision Cases are allowed and the

judgments, dated 28.06.2019, passed in Criminal Appeal Nos.344 of

2017, 346 of 2017 and 345 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the

learned XV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nuzvid, confirming

the conviction imposed against the petitioner/accused, vide

judgment, dated 18.09.2017, in C.C.Nos.153 of 2016, 66 of 2016

and judgment, dated 15.09.2017, passed in C.C.No.133 of 2016

respectively rendered by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate,

Mylavaram, are set aside. Consequently, the petitioner-accused is

2010 (5) SCC 663

BSB, J Crl.R.C.Nos.445, 446 & 447 of 2021

acquitted of the offence for which he was found guilty. His bail

bonds shall stand cancelled.

The Joint Memorandum of compromise, dated 21.11.2022,

filed by the parties shall form part of this common order.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________ B. S.BHANUMATHI, J 13.02.2023 RAR