CRL.P/8788/2017 of PUTTAMADAPPA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 25 August 2026

JUDGMENT

WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

1. The above appeals arise out of the judgment and order dated 18.09.2018 passed by the Court of the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru in Sessions Case No.345/2016.

2. Vide impugned judgment and order, the trial Court has convicted accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC and accused No. 2 for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC.

3. Accused No.1 is acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 144, 148, 323, 324, 307, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.

4. Accused No.2 is acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 144, 148, 323, 326, 307, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.

5. Accused Nos.3 to 5 and 8 are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 144, 148, 323, 324,

HC-KAR

326, 307, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC in addition, accused No.3 is acquitted of the offence under Section 109 of IPC.

6. The trial Court has sentenced accused No.1 to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months.

7. Accused No.2 was sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

8. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, accused No.1 has preferred Crl.A. No.1693/2018 and accused No.2 has preferred Crl.A. No.1716/18.

HC-KAR

9. Aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the defacto-complainant-PW1 has preferred Crl.A. No.82/2019 and the State has preferred Crl.A. No.1345/19.

10. Criminal Petition No.8788/2017 is preferred under Section 482 of CrPC by Accused No.9 to quash the order dated 19.10.2017 passed by the trial Court, on the application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 of CrPC.

11. The parties are present before the Court. The learned counsel appearing for the respective parties have submitted that, with the intervention of family members, elders, friends and well-wishers, the parties have settled the dispute amicably and they have resolved all the differences.

12. An application under Section 320(2) read with 482 of CrPC / under Section 359(2) read with 528 of BNSS, 2023, is filed, signed by the accused and their learned counsel. Further, a joint memo is also filed by the

HC-KAR

parties, signed by the accused, as well as the de-facto complainant-PW1, injured-PW3 and the respective learned counsel. The relevant paragraphs of the joint affidavit are extracted herein.

3. We state that we have tendered our unconditional apology to P.W.1 to P.W.3 for the untoward incident in question. With the intervention of our family members, elders, friends and well-wishers, we and P.W.1 to P.W.3 have amicably settled the dispute and resolved our differences.

4. We state that the settlement is voluntary, bona fide and arrived at without any force, coercion, threat or undue influence. We have no subsisting grievance against P.W.1 to P.W.3, and they have also no grievance against us.

5. We undertake that we shall not, in future, interfere with the personal or peaceful life of P.W.1 to P.W.3, cause them any harm, threat inconvenience, or indulge in any act giving rise to a further dispute. We undertake to maintain peace and cordial relations with them.

6. We further state that, as part of the amicable settlement, we undertake to withdraw, without any condition, the case pending in C.C. No. 1003/2017 on the file of the Hon'ble JMFC-II, Mysuru, and P.W.1 has also

HC-KAR

agreed to withdraw the case pending in C.C. No. 1009/2017, filed by P.W.1 against us.

7. We state that all the parties are residents of the same village and, in order to maintain peace and harmony, we have mutually agreed to put an end to all disputes and to live peacefully in the village without interfering with each other's affairs.

8. We further state that the settlement is genuine, bona fide and in the interest of all the parties. In view of the settlement and the undertakings given herein, continuation of the proceedings would serve no useful purpose.

13. The relevant paragraphs of the joint memo are extracted herein.

1. The parties submit that the dispute arising out of Crime No.97/2015 of Jayapura Police Station, which culminated in S.C. No.345/2016 on the file of the Hon'ble III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru, has been amicably settled between them with the intervention of their family members, elders, friends and well-wishers.

2. The injured/de facto complainant/P.W.1 to P.W.3 have voluntarily agreed to compound/settle the offences and have no objection for allowing the above appeals/petition and for acquitting the concerned accused/appellants, in accordance with law.

HC-KAR

3. The accused/appellants have tendered their unconditional apology to P.W.1 to P.W.3 and have undertaken not to interfere with their peaceful or personal life, cause any harm, threat or inconvenience to them, or indulge in any act giving rise to any further dispute.

4. The parties further submit that, as part of the to settlement, the accused/appellants undertake withdraw, without any condition, the case pending in C.C. No.1003/2017 on the file of the Hon'ble JMFC-II, Mysuru, and P.W.1 has also agreed to withdraw the case pending in C.C. No.1009/2017 filed against the accused/appellants.

5. The parties are residents of the same village and have mutually agreed to maintain peace, harmony and cordial relations and to live peacefully without interfering with each other's affairs.

6. The parties submit that the settlement is voluntary, genuine and bona fide and has been entered into without any force, coercion, threat or undue influence. In view of the settlement, the parties have no subsisting grievance against each other.

7. In the above circumstances, the parties jointly pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to take the settlement and the joint affidavits on record and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, including

HC-KAR

allowing the above appeals/petition, acquitting the concerned accused/appellants, and recording the withdrawal of CRL.A. No.82/2019, in the interest of justice and equity.

14. The Hon’ble Apex Court In Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2022) 14 SCC 531, has held that ‘the criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences or where the offences are predominantly of a private nature, can be annulled irrespective of the fact that trial has already been concluded or appeal stands dismissed against conviction. Handing out punishment is not the sole form of delivering justice. Societal method of applying laws evenly is always subject to lawful exceptions. It goes without saying, that the cases where compromise is struck post conviction, the High Court ought to exercise such discretion with rectitude, keeping in view the circumstances surrounding the incident, the fashion in which the compromise has been arrived at, and with due regard to the nature and

HC-KAR

seriousness of the offence, besides the conduct of the accused, before and after the incidence’.

15. In the case on hand, it is the case of the prosecution that on 15.07.2015 at about 02.00 p.m. when the son of PW1 was driving a Maruti Van, caused an accident resulting in hurt to one K.E.B Mallesh, a relative of accused No.1. Hence, at about 04.00 p.m. on the same day, accused No.1 to 5 and 8 along with two children in conflict with law and accused No.9, formed an unlawful assembly in front of the under-construction house of PW1 and they abused and assaulted PW1 to PW3 with weapons like chopper, clubs and stone and caused injuries to them.

16. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the trial Court has come to the conclusion that, the prosecution has not proved the assault made by the accused with the chopper and the injuries caused to PW3. Further, the trial Court held that

HC-KAR

the charges are proved only against accused 1 and 2 for the offences punishable u/s 326 and 324 IPC.

17. Ex.P18 is the wound certificate pertaining to PW1. Ex.P19 is the wound certificate pertaining to PW2. PW1 has sustained three injuries, out of which, injury No.3 is stated to be grievous in nature. As per Ex.P19, PW2 has sustained three injuries and injury No.1 is stated to be grievous in nature. The wound certificate pertaining to PW3 is not produced. But, as per MLC report

- Ex.P2, PW3 sustained simple injuries.

18. According to the evidence of the doctor-PW7, on the basis of X-ray reports, he had furnished his opinion that the above mentioned injuries are grievous in nature. However, the prosecution has not placed the said X-ray reports relating to PW1 and PW2. Hence, it cannot be held that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that PW1 and PW2 have sustained grievous injuries.

HC-KAR

19. A perusal of the medical evidence does not indicate that the injuries are life threatening or the accused had an intention to do away with the life of the injured. The trial Court, after appreciating the evidence in this regard, has acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC.

20. The accused, as well the victims are the residents of the same village. They have filed the joint affidavit and joint memo, reporting settlement. They have agreed to maintain Peace, harmony and cordial relation and to live peacefully. They, on their own volition, have willingly and voluntarily buried their differences and wished to accord a quietus to their dispute. Hence, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met by permitting them to settle the dispute, which would advance peace, harmony and fellowship amongst them and may improve their future relationship.

21. It is submitted that a sum of Rs.25,000/- has been deposited by accused 1 and 2 before the trial Court.

HC-KAR

The accused have voluntarily submitted that they are ready to deposit another sum of Rs.75,000/- and states that the said amount may be awarded as compensation to the victims.

22. Accused 1 and 2 are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.75,000/- before the trial Court within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the trial Court shall release the entire amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to PW1 and PW2, on due identification.

23. For the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

i. Criminal Appeals No.1716/2018 and 1693/2018 are allowed. The judgment and order dated 18.09.2018 convicting and sentencing accused No.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 326 and

HC-KAR

324 of IPC is hereby set aside and they are acquitted.

ii. Criminal Appeals No.

and 1345/2019 are dismissed.

iii. Criminal Petition No.8788/2017 is allowed. The impugned order dated 19.10.2017 is quashed.

Registry shall send back the TCR, forthwith.

Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

KBM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 14