Karnataka High Court
Ganapati S/O. Isahwar Patil vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 January, 2021
Author: K.Natarajan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF JANUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100201/2020
BETWEEN:
GANAPATI S/O.ISHWAR PATIL,
AGE : 34 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. HULAKOPPA, TAL : KALAGHATAGI,
DIST : DHARWAD.-581 204.
.. PETITIONER
(BY SRI R.H.ANGADI AND MISS JOSHNA P.DHANAVE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(HALIYAL U.K. POLICE STATION)
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
.. RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP)
THIS REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397
READ WITH SECTION 401 OF CR.P.C. AND PRAYED TO SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5007/2018
DATED 15.10.2020 BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, U.K., KARWAR SITTING AT SIRSI, CONFORMING
THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED IN
2
C.C.NO.143/2015 DATED 26.03.2018 BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC HALIYAL AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE ACCUSED FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 354 AND 323 OF
IPC IN HALIYAL P.S. CRIME NO.269/2014 TO MEET THE ENDS OF
JUSTICE AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THROUGH
PHYSICAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This revision petition is filed by the petitioner under Section
397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the
Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Civil Judge and
J.M.F.C., Haliyal (for short 'the trial Court') in Criminal Case
No.143/2015 dated 26.03.2018 and upheld by the I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, U.K. Karwar sitting at Sirsi (for short
'the first appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No.5007/2018 dated
15.10.2020 having convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the
offences punishable under Sections 354 and 323 of IPC sentencing
him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and imposed
fine of `500/- for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC
as well as sentenced under Section 354 of IPC passed by the trial
Court simple imprisonment for one year and fine of `1,000/- has
been modified by the first appellate Court under appeal.
2. During the pendency of this petition, petitioner as well
as the complainant-P.W-1-Deepa W/o. Pundalik Pujari appeared
before this Court and filed joint compromise petition under Section
320(2) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and they submits both are
compromised and settled their disputes and there is no grievance
against the petitioner for acquitting. Learned counsel for the
petitioner also contended that the petitioner and his wife are
residing separately. A divorce petition also filed before the Family
Court, Dharwar, which came to be dismissed and Miscellaneous
First Appeal has been filed before the High Court. The Division
Bench of this Court directed the parties to file joint divorce petition
under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and in view of the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2012) 10 SCC
303, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, seeking
permission of this Court for compounding of the offence on the
background of settlement between the parties. Also gone through
the Judgments of both Courts, the offence under Section 354 of IPC
though earlier it was bailable and compoundable, but subsequently,
the same was amended by the Legislature by making as non-
bailable and non-compoundable and in view of subsequent
development and settlement between the parties, both parties have
filed joint affidavit before this Court for having settled their disputes
amicably. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
complainant-P.W.-1 is none other than the sister-in-law of
petitioner and younger sister of wife of petitioner/accused who also
examined as P.W.3 before the trial Court and in view of the
compromise between the parties and they amicably settled their
disputes, the principles laid down in the case of Gian Singh's, I am
of the opinion that by invoking power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
permission shall have to be accorded to compound the offences.
3. Learned H.C.G.P. Sri Ramesh B. Chigari is also have no
objection for compounding the offences in view of the settlement
arrived between the parties.
4. Accordingly, the compromise petition is accepted. In
view of the compromise arrived between the parties, Criminal
Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of
Cr.P.C. by the petitioner/accused is allowed. The Judgment of
conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court and modified by
the first appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No.5007/2018 are
hereby set aside. The petitioner is acquitted for the offences
punishable under Sections 323 and 354 of IPC. Bail bond of
petitioner stands cancelled.
5. Fine amount deposited by the petitioner/accused before
the Court is ordered to be refunded to him after due identification.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ckk
