Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Chandrakant @ Ramchandra Raghunath Karke, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 359 of 1993 for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 1000, with default simple imprisonment for six months. He was acquitted of the offence under Section 366 IPC. The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal No. 598 of 1994. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant filed Criminal Application No. 862 of 2005, stating that the complainant and the appellant had settled the matter and sought permission to compound the offence. The Court noted that the offence under Section 363 IPC is not compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). However, the Court, in the interest of justice and to promote settlement between the parties, allowed the application and permitted compounding. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant. The appellant was on bail, and his bail bonds were discharged.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Compounding of Offences - Section 363 IPC - Section 320 CrPC - The appellant was convicted under Section 363 IPC for kidnapping. During appeal, the parties filed a compromise and sought permission to compound the offence. The Court held that although Section 363 IPC is not compoundable under Section 320 CrPC, the High Court can, in the interest of justice and to promote settlement, permit compounding and acquit the accused. The Court allowed the application and acquitted the appellant. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court can permit compounding of an offence under Section 363 IPC, which is not compoundable under Section 320 CrPC, in the interest of justice and to promote settlement between the parties.
Final Decision
The Court allowed Criminal Application No. 862 of 2005, permitted compounding of the offence, allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant. Bail bonds discharged.
Law Points
- Compounding of non-compoundable offences
- Section 363 IPC
- Section 320 CrPC
- Inherent powers of High Court
- Settlement between parties
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (02) 206
Criminal Appeal No. 598 of 1994 with Criminal Application No. 862 of 2005
Mr. V.G. Peshave for the appellant, Mr. A.S. Shitole, APP for the State
Chandrakant @ Ramchandra Raghunath Karke
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction under Section 363 IPC for kidnapping.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought acquittal by challenging conviction and sentence, and later sought permission to compound the offence.
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune for kidnapping under Section 363 IPC.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted appellant under Section 363 IPC and sentenced to two years RI and fine; acquitted under Section 366 IPC.
Issues
Whether the High Court can permit compounding of an offence under Section 363 IPC, which is not compoundable under Section 320 CrPC, in the interest of justice and to promote settlement between the parties.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant filed application stating that the complainant and appellant have settled the matter and sought permission to compound the offence.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court can, in the interest of justice and to promote settlement between parties, permit compounding of an offence that is not compoundable under Section 320 CrPC, and acquit the accused.
Judgment Excerpts
The appellant is the original accused who is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No.359 of 1993 whereby the Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant - original accused No.1 for the offence punishable under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and further to pay fine of Rs 1000/- and, in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months.
In the said application, he has stated that permission may be granted to the complainant and the applicant, the appellant herein, to compound the offence and the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court may be set aside.
The offence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code is not compoundable. However, in the interest of justice and to promote settlement between the parties, I am inclined to allow the application and permit the parties to compound the offence.
In the result, Criminal Application No.862 of 2005 is allowed. The parties are permitted to compound the offence. Consequently, Criminal Appeal No.598 of 1994 is allowed. The judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No.359 of 1993 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code.
Procedural History
The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 359 of 1993 for offence under Section 363 IPC and sentenced to two years RI and fine. He appealed to the High Court. During appeal, he filed an application for compounding the offence. The High Court allowed the application and acquitted him.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 363, 366
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 320
