Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 1342

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ajay Rastogi, Abhay S. Oka, JJ.
Sri Bimal Chandra Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tripura – Respondent
SLP (Criminal) Diary No. 2339 of 2022
Decided On : 11-02-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate, Ms. Bhuvneshwari Pathak, Advocate, Ms. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Advocate, Mr. Bhupendra Bhardwaj, Advocate, Ms. Prashi Tyagi, Advocate, Ms. Akansha Agarwal, Advocate, Mr. Kausik Roy, Advocate, For the Appellant.

Post-conviction compromises may not be granted credence in criminal cases.

Headnote:
Compromise - Criminal Law - The court rejected the petitioner's request for exemption from surrendering based on a compromise entered into after the conviction was upheld by the High Court under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was convicted under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, and after the conviction was upheld by the High Court, the petitioner sought exemption from surrendering based on a compromise with the complainant/victim.
Finding of the Court:

The court rejected the petitioner's request for exemption, stating that the compromise entered into after the conviction was not credible.
Issues: Conviction under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, request for exemption based on a post-conviction compromise.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found no reason to grant credence to the compromise entered into after the conviction was confirmed by the High Court.
Final Decision: The Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and any pending application(s) were disposed of.

ORDER

1. IA No. 12042/2022 seeking Exemption From Surrendering is rejected.

2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

3. The petitioner after full trial was convicted under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and his conviction was upheld by the High Court.

4. At this stage, the petitioner has now come with a case that a compromise has been entered into between the petitioner and the complainant/victim.

5. We find no reason to grant any credence to such compromise which is being entered into after the conviction has been confirmed by the High Court under the judgment impugned.

6. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document