Satish Kumar Gota v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Jul 2025CRR/954/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compounding of offence under Section 354 IPC; Section 359(1), 359(2), 359(8) BNSS 2023; Sections 320(2), 320(8) and 437-A Cr.P.C.; acquittal on compromise; joint compromise petition with victim/complainant affidavits; victim identified via DLSA Kanker video conferencing; State counsel no objection; criminal revision CRR 954/2016 High Court of Chhattisgarh; Kodekhurse, North Bastar Kanker; bail bonds continued for six months.

What did the court decide?

Permission to compound the offence under Section 354 IPC granted to the victim/complainant; applicant acquitted of the offence under Section 354 IPC; bail bonds of the applicant to remain in force for six months under Section 437-A Cr.P.C. ¶¶27

Satish Kumar Gota Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the joint compromise petitions (I.A. Nos. 03/2025 and 02/2025) filed by the applicant and the victim/complainant justify permission to compound the offence under Section 354 IPC under Section 359 BNSS 2023 and the applicant's acquittal thereon. +1 more

¶¶15

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the compromise petition filed under Section 359(1) BNSS 2023 was allowed and permission to compound the offence was granted to the victim/complainant vis-à-vis the accused/applicant.

¶¶25

Ratio / Principle

On the basis of the matter being compounded between the parties, and in view of Section 359(8) BNSS 2023 corresponding to Section 320(8) Cr.P.C., the applicant is acquitted of the offence under Section 354 IPC.

¶¶26

Key takeaways

Since the applicant is reported to be on bail, his bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months from the date of the order in view of Section 437-A Cr.P.C.ratio¶¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Chhattisgarh HC (Bilaspur), CRR No. 954 of 2016 — order dated 11.07.2025 (Radhakishan Agrawal, J.) disposing of a criminal revision against the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanupratappur's judgment dated 07.09.2016 (Criminal Appeal No. 08/2013) affirming the JMFC, Bhanupratapur conviction dated 24.09.2013 (Criminal Case No. 139/2012) of the applicant under S. 354 IPC with RI 6 months and Rs. 500/- fine (default: further RI 1 month). Acting on joint compromise petitions I.A. Nos. 03/2025 and 02/2025 under S. 359(1) BNSS 2023 filed by the applicant and the victim/complainant — who appeared through District Legal Services Authority, Kanker video-conferencing, was identified by counsel Kripesh G. Kela, and attested a voluntary settlement without pressure or fear (petition dated 28.04.2025 with affidavits), the State raising no objection — the Court allowed the petition and granted the victim/complainant permission to compound the offence. Thereupon, invoking S. 359(8) BNSS 2023 (corresponding to S. 320(8) Cr.P.C.), the Court acquitted the applicant of the S. 354 IPC offence and directed that his bail bonds remain in force for six months under S. 437-A Cr.P.C.

2025:CGHC:32351

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRR No. 954 of 2016

¶6

Satish Kumar Gota S/o Mansingh Gota Aged About 21 Years Health Worker, Preliminary Health Center Karaki, R/o New Hospital Kodekhurse, Police Station Kodekhurse, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.,

¶7

Digitally signed by ANJANI KUMAR ALLENA Date: 2025.07.11 17:35:21 +0530

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kodekhurse, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

		... Respondent
For Applicant	: Shri Rakesh Kumar Thakur, applicant–Satish Kumar Gota.	Advocate with the
For Respondent/State	: Shri Sachidanand Yadav, P.L.
Forcomplainant	: Shri KripeshG. Kela,Advocate.

¶12

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL)

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

11/07/2025

¶15

Heard on I.A.No.03/2025 filed under Section 359 (1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘B.N.S.S. 2023’) for permission to compromise and on I.A.No.02/2025 filed under Section 359 (1) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 for compromise filed by both the applicant and victim/complainant for compromise the matter and for acquittal of the applicant of the offence under Section 354 of the IPC.

¶16

The above compromise petitions have been filed jointly by the applicant and complainant/Victim, who appeared through Video Conferencing provided by

¶17

¶18

the District Legal Services Authority, Kanker Victim is identified by Shri Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate.

¶19

This revision has been preferred by the applicant against the judgment dated 07.09.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.08/2013 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanupratappur, Dist. North Bastar Kanker whereby the appellate Court affirmed the judgment dated 24.09.2013 passed in Criminal Case No. 139/2012 by the JMFC, Bhanupratapur convicting the applicant under Section 354 of IPC and sentenced to RI for 6 months with fine of Rs.500/and in default thereof, further RI for one month.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant as well as for the victim jointly submit that the offence under Section 354 of IPC is compoundable with the permission of the Court, under Section 359 (2) of the B.N.S.S., corresponding to Section 320 (2) Cr.P.C. They further submit that both the applicant and the victim are working in same place and in order to keep the relations cordial between them, they are willing to settle the matter amicably and voluntarily.

¶21

On the other hand, learned State Counsel has raised no objection while submitting that the offence under Section 354 of Cr.P.C. is compoundable.

¶22

In compromise petition dated 28.04.2025, it is mentioned by the complainant that she has settled the dispute amicably and further submits she entered the compromise voluntarily and on her own will with the applicant and that there is no pressure or fear from any third party. In support of this compromise petition, affidavits of the complainant and the victim have been filed. On being asked, victim/complainant submits that working place of both of them was one and the same, therefore, without any fear or pressure, she is voluntarily compounding the case.

¶23

Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the compromise petition filed under Section 359 (1) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 allowed and the

¶24

¶25

permission to compound the offence with the accused/applicant is granted to the victim/complainant.

¶26

On the basis of the matter being compounded between the parties and in view of Section 359 (8) of B.N.S.S. 2023 corresponding to Section 320 (8) of Cr.P.C., the applicant is acquitted of the offence under Section 354 of IPC. Since the applicant is reported to be on bail, therefore, his bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of provision of Section 437-A of Cr.P.C.

¶27

In view of what has been stated above, the revision stands disposed of.

¶28

Sd/(Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE

¶29

Anjani

Satish Kumar Gota v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Kumar Gota v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh Singh Rajput Vs Ramjas Kaushik

Ajay Shukla Vs Arun Kumar

Pawan Singh Rajput Vs Tarak Das

Rampher Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ganesh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunil Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh