Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SUBHENDU SAMANTA
Shaik Khaja, S/O Khaja – Appellant
Versus
State of A P, Rep. By The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. compromise between the parties. (Para 4 , 8) |
| 3. court's observations on non-compoundable offences. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. use of inherent powers under section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 5. final conclusion and order of the court. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J.
1. These interlocutory applications are filed for recording the compromise arrived at between the accused/petitioner and the de facto complainant/2nd respondent, and seeking permission to compound the offence under Section 326 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, “IPC”), in C.C. No.559 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla.
2. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. Perused the impugned order.
3. The instant present Criminal Revision Case has been filed against the judgment, dated 18.02.2009, passed by the learned V Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, in Crl.A. No.52 of 2008. The petitioner was arrayed as an accused in C.C. No.559 of 2006 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bapatla, Guntur District, and was charged for the offence punishable under Sectio
The High Court can quash convictions for non-compoundable offences when the parties have amicably settled their disputes, preserving justice and social harmony.
The court can quash criminal proceedings based on the compromise between the parties, following the guidelines to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of any Court.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
