Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.11.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.RC.No.181 of 2018
S.Sivabagyam ... Petitioner
Vs.
N.Pradeep Kumar ... Respondent
PRAYER:
Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 and 401 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, to set aside the judgment dated 27.09.2016 made in
CA.No.253 of 2015 on the file of the learned V Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Coimbatore confirming the judgment dated 08.12.2015
made in CC.No.1 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Fast Track Court No.II, Magisterial Level, Coimbatore by allowing the
present criminal revision case.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Babu
For Respondent : No appearance
ORDER
This criminal revision has been filed to set aside the judgment
dated 27.09.2016 made in CA.No.253 of 2015 on the file of the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/8 Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore confirming the
judgment dated 08.12.2015 made in CC.No.1 of 2014 on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Magisterial Level,
Coimbatore by allowing the present criminal revision case.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that while pending this criminal revision, both the parties entered into
compromise and accordingly settled the amount which was agreed by the
respondent herein.
3. Heard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
4. It is seen that the petitioner has also filed affidavit dated
01.11.2022 before this Court stating that the matter has been settled
between the parties.
5. In this regard, it is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ramgopal and others vs.
The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2021 (6) CTC 240 and the
relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/8 Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
18. It is now a well crystalized axiom that the plenary jurisdiction of this Court to impart complete justice under Article 142 cannot ipso facto be limited or restricted by ordinary statutory provisions. It is also noteworthy that even in the absence of an express provision akin to Section 482 Cr.P.C. conferring powers on the Supreme Court to abrogate and set aside criminal proceedings, the jurisdiction exercisable under Article 142 of the Constitution embraces this Court with scopious powers to quash criminal proceedings also, so as to secure complete justice. In doing so, due regard must be given to the overarching objective of sentencing in the criminal justice system, which is grounded on the sublime philosophy of maintenance of peace of the collective and that the rationale of placing an individual behind bars is aimed at his reformation.
19. We thus sumup and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences ‘compoundable’ within the statutory framework, the extraordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/8 Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.
20. Having appraised the aforestated parameters and weighing upon the peculiar facts and circumstances of the two appeals before us, we are inclined to invoke powers under Article 142 and quash the criminal proceedings and consequently set aside the conviction in both the appeals. We say so for the reasons that: Firstly, the occurrence(s) involved in these appeals can be categorized as purely personal or having overtones of criminal proceedings of private nature;
Secondly, the nature of injuries incurred, for which the Appellants have been convicted, do not appear to exhibit their mental depravity or commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override public interest;
Thirdly, given the nature of the offence and injuries, it is immaterial that the trial against the Appellants had been concluded or their appeal(s) against conviction stand https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/8 Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
dismissed; Fourthly, the parties on their own volition, without any coercion or compulsion, willingly and voluntarily have buried their differences and wish to accord a quietus to their dispute(s); Fifthly, the occurrence(s) in both the cases took place way back in the years 2000 and 1995, respectively. There is nothing on record to evince that either before or after the purported compromise, any untoward incident transpired between the parties;
Sixthly, since the Appellants and the complainant(s) are residents of the same village(s) and/or work in close vicinity, the quashing of criminal proceedings will advance peace, harmony, and fellowship amongst the parties who have decided to forget and forgive any illwill and have no vengeance against each other; and Seventhly, the cause of administration of criminal justice system would remain uneffected on acceptance of the amicable settlement between the parties and/or resultant acquittal of the Appellants; more so looking at their present age.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the judgment in CA.No.253 of 2015
dated 27.09.2016 on the file of the learned V Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Coimbatore and the judgment dated 08.12.2015 made in
CC.No.1 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/8 Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
Court No.II, Magisterial Level, Coimbatore are set aside. The affidavit of
the petitioner dated 01.11.2022 shall form part and parcel of this order.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision is allowed.
01.11.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6/8
Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
To
1.The learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore
2.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Magisterial Level, Coimbatore
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/8 Crl.R.C.No.181 of 2018
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok
Crl.RC.No.181 of 2018
01.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/8
