HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No:381 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: The present appeal is filed by the petitioner-accused against the judgment in C.C.No.10 of 2008 dated 15.2.2010 on the file the Special Court under A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, Hyderabad. The case of the prosecution brief is as follows: The 1st petitioner-accused run chit fund business, collected huge amounts as fixed deposits on nominal interest of 2% per month from various depositors, became due to a tune of Rs.2 Crores to the chit subscribers and depositors and failed to repay the said amount to them. Thus, he committed criminal breach of trust. Hence, a case in Crime No. 770 of 2005 of South Zone & WCO, Team-II, CCS DD, Hyderabad, was registered against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506 of IPC and Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act. The prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 20 and also exhibited Exs.P-1 to P43. When the evidence was over and the matter was coming up for examination of the accused i.e., the petitioner and others under Section 313 Cr.P.C., an application in Crl.M.P.No.735 of 2009 was filed requesting the Court below to compound the said offence for the reason that the entire amounts have already been paid by the 1st petitioner to the complainant and others. The Court below having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition and also the offences, compounded the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 506 IPC, but so far as the offence punishable under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act is concerned, as it is not compoundable, the Court below refused to compound the said offence. Accordingly, the Court below proceeded further and examined the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and ultimately, found the petitioner guilty of the said offence and by order, dated 16.2.2010 imposed the sentence of two (2) months and 15 days and further directed him to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. The same is questioned in this appeal. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had already undergone the entire sentence i.e., two months and 15 days and he also paid the fine amount and insofar as other offences are concerned, they are compounded, but if the sentence remains on record against the petitioner-accused, there is every likelihood of loosing his job and therefore, the offence under Section 5 of the Act also may be recorded as compounded. Admittedly, both the parties settled the matters and the amount in question was already paid by the petitioner and other accused to the complainant and other depositors and that necessitated them to file an application under Section 320(1) Cr.P.C. to get the said offences compounded. The Court below recorded the said compromise and compounded the offences under Section 406, 420 and 506 IPC. The offence punishable under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, is not compoundable and in that view of the matter, the Court below is justified in not getting the said offence compounded. Now, the point requires to be considered is as to whether there is any justification if the offence under Section 5 of the Act is compounded. The Supreme Court as well as this Court held that in peculiar circumstances of the case, even in cases, which are not compoundable, the Court may exercise its discretion and compound the said offence. The petitioner herein is working as Office Superintendent, ESI Hospital, Erragadda, Hyderabad and the alleged offence is of the year 2005. As the entire amount has already been paid to the various depositors and the petitioner had faced trauma for the last more than five years and he has also undergone the sentence of two and half months as imposed by the Court and an application is also filed before the Court to compound the offence, this Court is of the view that the offence under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act can be compounded in the interest of justice. In view of the same, the petitioner-accused is hereby acquitted for the offence under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the judgment of the Court below. __________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada Dated: 23.3.2011 Nn HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No:381 OF 2010 23.3.2011