Musku Ram Reddy, v. M. Srinivasa Reddy
Case brief
What is this about?
In this criminal revision, the High Court quashed the impugned order dismissing the petitioners' compromise petition under Section 320 Cr.P.C. regarding a non-compoundable offence. The Court directed the parties to file a fresh application before the Sessions Judge to consider the out-of-court settlement in the interest of justice.
What did the court decide?
Directed parties to file a fresh application under Section 320 Cr.P.C. before the V Additional Sessions Judge, Medak to consider the compromise in view of the out-of-court settlement.
What the court decided
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.547 of 2016
ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by order, dated 28.12.2015, passed in Crl.M.P. No.211 of 2015 in Crl.A. No.115 of 2014 passed by the V Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, whereby the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the application filed under Section 320 (2) & (8) Cr.P.C., by the petitioners and the respondents.
Initially, a case in Crime No.81 of 2011 on the file of BDL Police Station, Bhanoor, for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 324 and 506 r/w. 34 IPC. After investigating the matter, the police altered the Section of law from 324 IPC to 307 IPC. Then, the case was tried the Assistant Sessions Judge, Sangareddy and the trial Court convicted the petitioners and sentenced them. Against the said judgment, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the V Additional Sessions Judge, Medak. The petitioners also filed a civil suit in O.S. No.3 of 2010 against the father of the 1st respondent before the civil Court and on the advise of the elders and well wishers to put an end to the civil and criminal litigations, the said civil suit was settled before the Lok Adalat on 06.12.2014 and the petitioners as well as the respondents filed a petition under Section 320(2) & (8) Cr.P.C., before the appellate Court to record the compromise and as the matter was settled out of Court. The appellate Court dismissed said application through the impugned order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed this revision.
Heard and perused the material available on record.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition for compromise recording under Section 320 Cr.P.C. can be considered for a non-compoundable offence where parties settled out of court.
Whether a compromise pending settlement can be considered in the interest of justice even for a non-compoundable offence like Section 307 IPC.
Whether the direction to file a fresh application for compromise under Section 320 Cr.P.C. can quash or modify the impugned order dismissing the compromise petition.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioners
- respondent
Respondents
Coram
Raja Elango
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLRC/547/2016
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court