SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(SC) 722

B.P.SINGH, ARUN KUMAR
K. Kandasamy – Appellant
Versus
K. P. M. V. P. Chandrasekaran – Respondent


Judgment

B.P. Singh, J.—This matter has been settled between the parties happily and a joint application has been filed by the appellant and the respondent under Section 320(5) Cr.P.C. for compounding the offence. A joint application is accompanied by affidavits of both the appellants and the respondent. The terms have been set out in para 3 of the joint petition, which is as follows:-

“(a) The aggregate fine amount of Rs. 8,000/- paid into the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Tuticorin by both the appellants will be made over to the respondent.

(b) No further disputes of any nature will be raised by either the appellants or the respondent in respect of the matters concerning the present case.”

2. Having regard to the facts of the case, we are of the view that permission may be granted to the parties to compound the offence. Accordingly, permission is granted and order is passed in terms of the settlement reached between the parties which is extracted above.

3. In view of the compounding of the offence, appellants are acquitted of the offence under Section 500 IPC with which they were charged and convicted.

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

4. It is agreed before us that t


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top