IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 794 of 2002() ----------------------------- CRA.47/1999 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), ALAPPUZHA CC.39/1995 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHERTHALA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- RADHAKRISHNAN S/O.KUTTAPPAN, KANJIRATHUMVELLI HOUSE,WARD NO.11,PATTANAKADU, CHERTHALA BY ADV. SRI.P.S.GEORGE SRI.JOBY CYRIAC SRI.TOMY P.T. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT IN CRL.APPEAL --------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY OF KERALA THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM *ADDL.RESPONDENTS IMPLEADED 1. SANTHAMMA, W/O.LATE DASAPPAN AGED 64 HOUSE NO.262, PUTHANTHARA, PATTANAKAD.P.O., CHERTHALA. 2. PRAJITH KUMAR S/O.LATE DASAPPAN AGED 42 HOUSE NO.262, PUTHANTHARA, PATTANAKAD.P.O., CHERTHALA. 3. BIJU S/O.LATE DASAPPAN, AGED 36, HOUSE NO.262, PUTHANTHARA, PATTANAKAD.P.O., CHERTHALA ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 AS PER ORDER DATED 1.4.2011 IN CRL.M.A.NO.2777/11. ADV. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN FOR ADDL.R2,3&4 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. --------------------------------- Crl. R.P. No.794 OF 2002 ----------------------------------- Dated 4th Day of March , 2011 ORDER The revision petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under section 324 of IPC and the trial court as well as the lower appellate court found that the accused is guilty of the above offence and accordingly he is convicted and sentenced for the said offence, which are challenged in the revision petition. 2. The above revision petition is preferred by the sole accused in C.C.No.39/95 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Cherthala challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 324 of IPC connected with the incident taken place at about 6.00 p.m on 18.9.1994 wherein the allegation is that the revision petitioner/accused in furtherance of his common intention to cause hurt to PW1 the defacto complainant due to previous enmity inflicted with injury over the right thigh above the elbow, left shoulder and left forearm of the defacto complainant after chasing him on a bicycle and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 324 of IPC. The trial court on conviction and sentenced in the revision Crl. R.P. No.794 OF 2002 2 petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- and the default sentence is fixed as two months simple imprisonment. It is also ordered that on realisation of the fine amount a sum of Rs.1,500/- shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of Cr.P.C. Though an appeal was filed challenging the above conviction and sentence, by judgment dated 16.4.2002 Crl. Appeal No. 47 of 1999 the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court (Adhoc-I), Alappuzha dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner by the trial court. 3. During the pendency of the above revision petition the matter has been settled out of court between the contesting parties and the revision petitioner/accused and the respondents who are the legal representatives of the deceased defacto complainant PW1 and by separate order today in Crl.M.A.No.2778 of 2011, this Court accorded permission to the parties compound the offence and accordingly, composition of offence under Section 324 is recorded. By virtue of Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C, as the matter is setted out of court and compounded, the revision petitioner is entitled to get an acquittal. Crl. R.P. No.794 OF 2002 3 In the result, this Crl. Revision petition is allowed setting aside the judgments 1 and 2 and acquitting the revision petitioner of all the charges levelled against him in the above case and he is set at liberty. The Crl.R.P is allowed accordingly. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE pm/- Crl. R.P. No.794 OF 2002 4 V.K.MOHANAN, J. ----------------------------------- Crl. M.A.No. 2778 of 2011 in Crl.R.P.No.794 of 2002 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of March, 2011. ORDER This is the joint application under Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C by the legal representatives of the defacto complainant who were impleaded in this revision petition as per the order dated 1.4.2011 in Crl.M.A.No.2777 of 2011 and the revision petitioner/accused. 2. The above revision petition is preferred by the sole accused in C.C.No.39/95 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Cherthala challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 324 of IPC connected with the incident taken place at about 6.00 p.m on 18.9.1994 wherein the allegation is that the revision petitioner/accused in furtherance of his common intention to cause hurt to PW1 the defacto complainant due to previous enmity inflicted with injury over the right thigh above the elbow, left shoulder and left forearm of the defacto complainant after chasing him on a bicycle and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 324 of IPC. The trial court on conviction and sentenced in the revision petitioner to undergo Crl. R.P. No.794 OF 2002 5 simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- and the default sentence is fixed as two months simple imprisonment. It is also ordered that on realisation of the fine amount a sum of Rs.1,500/- shall be paid to the complainant as compensation under Section 357(1) of Cr.P.C. Though an appeal was filed challenging the above conviction and sentence, by judgment dated 16.4.2002 Crl. Appeal No. 47 of 1999 the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court(Adhoc-I), Alappuzha dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner by the trial court. 3. During the pendency of the above revision petition as I indicated earlier the legal representatives of the defacto complainant-PW1, are impleaded in the revision petition as additional respondent 2 to 4. It is thereafter they moved this petition under Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C to compound the offence under Section 324 of IPC. 4. I have gone through the compounding petition and I am satisfied with the terms and conditions incorporated therein and also the affidavit and other documents filed along with the above compounding petition. The petition is signed by the contesting parties and counter signed by their respective counsels. Since the Crl. R.P. No.794 OF 2002 6 offence taken place on 18.9.1994 Section 324 IPC is a compoundable offence. Since the parties have settled the dispute out of court, this Court need not stand the way against the materialization of composition of the offence and according to me the duty of the court is see that the dispute is settled amicably out of court and to have a cordial relationship between the parties. Thus, according to me, this petition can be allowed granting permission to compound the offence for which the revision petitioner is stand convicted and sentenced. In the result, this petition is allowed and the parties are permitted to compound the offence under Section 324 of IPC for which the revision petitioner is stand convicted and sentence and accordingly, the composition of the said offence is recorded. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE pm/-