Karnataka High Court
C. Shankar vs State By Srirangapatna Police on 25 November, 2021
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.659 OF 2011
BETWEEN
1. C. SHANKAR
S/O. LATE CHELUVAIAH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
2. K. LOKESHSWAMY
S/O. K. THIMMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
3. K. THIMMAIAH
S/O. LATE KENCHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF
AMBEDKAR COLONY
OF NAGUVINAHALLI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK. ... APPELLANTS
[BY SRI. SYED AKBAR PASHA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MAHANTESH S. HASMATH, ADVOCATE]
AND
STATE BY SRIRANGAPATNA POLICE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE. ... RESPONDENT
[BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP.
SRI. RAMESHA H.E., ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANT.]
***
2
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2)
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.06.2011
PASSED BY THE P.O., FTC, SRIRANGAPATNA IN S.C. NO.105/2008-
CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED FOR OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 448, 324 READ WITH 34 OF IPC
AND THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ARE SENTENCED TO UNDERGO
S.I. FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS EACH AND TO PAY FINE OF
`500/- (RUPEES FIVE HUNDRED ONLY) EACH, IN DEFAULT, TO
UNDERGO S.I. FOR A PERIOD OF ONE MONTH EACH FOR OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 448 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND
THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED ARE SENTENCED TO UNDERGO S.I.
FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR EACH AND TO PAY FINE OF `2,000/-
(RUPEES TWO THOUSAND ONLY) EACH, IN DEFAULT, TO UNDERGO
S.I. FOR A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS EACH FOR OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324 READ WITH 34 OF IPC.
SUBSTANTIVE SENTENCES FOR BOTH OFFENCES SHALL RUN
CONCURRENTLY.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCE, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.
No.105/2008 on the file of the Court of the Fast Track
Judge, Srirangapatna.
2. The trial Court by Judgment and Order dated
23.06.2011 has convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 for offences
punishable under Sections 448, 324 r/w 34 of IPC.
3. The trial Court has sentenced accused Nos.1 to
3 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months
each and to pay a fine of `500/- each and in default, to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month
each for offence punishable under Sections 448 r/w 34 of
IPC.
Accused Nos.1 to 3 are also sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of one year each and to
pay a fine of `2,000/- each, in default, to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of 3 months each for offence
punishable under Sections 324 r/w 34 of IPC.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits
that the parties are closely related to each other and they
have settled their disputes and they are living peacefully in
their village. He submits that the complainant-P.W.1 as
well as the victim-P.W.2 have settled the dispute with the
appellants/accused Nos.1 to 3 and they are willing to
compound the offence.
5. The learned counsel Sri. Ramesh H.E, has filed
vakalat for the complainant viz., Chikkamancha-P.W.1 and
seeks permission of the Court to appear on behalf of the
complainant. He is permitted to appear for the
complainant/P.W.1 and file necessary affidavit.
6. Both the learned counsel have filed joint
affidavit of the appellants/accused Nos.1 to 3 as well as
P.Ws.1 and 2, wherein it is stated that due to some
property issue, the case was registered and subsequently,
the victim has amicably settled the dispute and both the
complainant as well as the victim have agreed to withdraw
the allegations made against the appellants. It is also
stated that the parties are closely related and P.W.2 has
married accused No.1's brother's daughter.
7. The appellant/accused Nos.1 to 3 as well as the
complainant-P.W.1 and the victim-P.W.2 are present before
the Court. They are identified by their respective counsel.
8. Charges are framed against accused Nos.1 to 5
for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448,
307, 114 r/w 149 of IPC.
9. The allegations are that on 20.09.2006 at about
10.00 a.m. when C.Ws.1 and 2 [P.Ws.1 and 2] were having
lunch in their house situated at Ambedkar Colony,
Naguvinahalli, all the accused barged into their house and
quarreled with them and assaulted with M.Os.1 and 2 and
caused injuries to P.W.2.
10. The trial Court has acquitted accused Nos.4 and
5 of all the charges and convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 for
offences punishable under Sections 448, 324 r/w 34 of IPC.
11. Section 324 of IPC is non-compoundable in
nature.
12. The learned counsel for the appellants placing
reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Ramgopal and Anr. Vs. The State of Madhya
Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1489/2012 connected
with Crl.A. No.1488/2012 decided on 29.09.2021
submits that, the parties are closely related and they have
amicably settled their disputes, hence by exercising power
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Judgment and Order of
conviction and sentence may be set aside.
13. In the aforesaid decision, the Hon'ble Apex
Court has observed that criminal proceedings involving
non-henious offences or where the offences are pre-
dominantly of a private nature, can be annulled irrespective
of the fact that the trial has already been concluded or
appeal stands dismissed against the conviction. It is
further observed that the cases where compromise is
struck post-conviction, the High Court ought to exercise
such discretion with rectitude, keeping in view the
circumstances surrounding the incident, the fashion in
which the compromise has been arrived at, and with due
regard to the nature and seriousness of the offence,
besides the conduct of the accused, before and after the
incident.
14. The Hon'ble Apex Court has further held that,
having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that
the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the
victim is willingly consented to the nullification of criminal
proceedings, the High Court can quash such proceedings in
exercise of its inherent powers, even if the offences are
non-compoundable.
15. Ex.P2 is the wound certificate of the victim-
P.W.2 which reveal that he sustained contusion swelling of
size 4 x 3 c.m. on right tempero parietal scalp. The said
injury is stated to be simple in nature. Apart from the said
injury, there is no other injury sustained by him. According
to the prosecution, he was assaulted with handle of a
spade-M.O.1 and club-M.O.2. According to prosecution,
P.W.2 was assaulted on his head by accused No.1 with
M.O.1 and on his back by accused No.2, with M.O.2 and he
was kicked by accused No.3. Apart from the above injury,
mentioned in Ex.P.2, there is no injury sustained by P.W.2.
Even though the doctor-P.W.5 has deposed in his evidence
that he gave first-aid treatment and referred P.W.2 to a
higher hospital, however, there is absolutely no document
placed by the prosecution to show that P.W.2 took
treatment in a higher hospital.
16. The respective parties present before the Court
have submitted that they are closely related and have
settled their disputes. No untoward incident has taken
place between them subsequent to the incident in question.
The parties have on their own volition and without any
coercion or compulsion, appears to have buried their
differences and wish to accord a quietus to their dispute/s.
The incident is purely personal and private in nature. The
affidavit filed by the respective parties would reflect bona
fide settlement between them.
17. In the above facts and circumstances, this Court
is of the view that the Judgment relied upon by the learned
counsel for the appellants is squarely applicable to the case
on hand as closing the criminal proceedings against the
appellants will advance peace and harmony amongst the
parties. Hence, the following:
ORDER
Criminal Appeal is allowed.
The Judgment and Order dated 23.06.2011 passed in
S.C. No.105/2008 by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track
Court, Srirangapatna, is hereby set aside. The appellants
are acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 448,
324 r/w 34 of IPC. Their bail bonds stand cancelled.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Ksm*
