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

1994 Supreme(AP) 5

B.SUBHASHAN REDDY
Annamdevula Srinivasa Rao – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


B. SUBHASHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN all these criminal petitions, a short but interesting and importing question of law arises for consideration of this Court as to whether this Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code ), can direct the subordinate criminal courts to accord permission to compound an offence which is otherwise non-compoundable under the Code ?

( 2 ) DIRECTIONS are sought from this Court to compound variety of non-compoundable offences such as Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (Criminal Petitions Nos. 3460 and 3461 of 1994), Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (Crl. P. No. 277 and 932 of 1994 and 2633 and 2685 of 1995), Sections 494 and 498-A, I. P. C. (Crl. Ps. Nos. 748 of 1994 and 1662 of 1995), Section 307 of Indian Penal Code (Crl. M. P. No. 1182/94), Section 452, I. P. C. (Crl. Petns. Nos. 2951 and 2952 of 1995 ).

( 3 ) IN Crl. P. No. 277 of 1994, the petitioner-accused was already convicted and sentenced by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sattenapalli by judgment dated 8-4-1993 for the offence u/s. 498-A, I. P. C. and Crl. A. No. 36 of 1993 preferred by him was pending bef
















































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