1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6815 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

KUMARA N.

S/O. NAGARAJU,

AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.51,

HALE KAMANAKOPPALU VILLAGE,

YELWALA HOBLI, MYSURU DISTRICT,

KARNATAKA 3 571 130.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI SOMASHEKARA K.M., ADV.)

AND:

1.

STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY YELWALA POLICE STATION,

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING,

BENGALURU 3 560 001.

2.

SRI BASAVARAJU

S/O. SRI CHIKKAPUTTA,

AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.34,

HALE KAMANAKOPPALU VILLAGE,

YELWALA HOBLI, MYSURU DISTRICT,

KARNATAKA 3 571 130.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, H.C.G.P., FOR R-1)

* * *

2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF

THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH/SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED

3-2-2021 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C. (II COURT), MYSURU, IN C.C.

NO.3488 OF 2019 (ARISING OUT OF P.C.R. NO.97 OF 2018) AS FAR AS

PETITIONER-ACCUSED NO.8 IS CONCERNED, AND ETC.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice

for respondent No.1-State. Looking to the facts and

circumstances of the case, notice to respondent No.2 is

dispensed with.

2. This petition is filed by accused No.8 under Section

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short,

8Cr.P.C.9) for setting aside the order dated 3-2-2021 passed by

the J.M.F.C. (II Court), Mysuru, in C.C. No.3488 of 2019

(arising out of P.C.R. No.97 of 2018) for the offences

punishable under Sections 148, 448, 341, 323, 504, 506 and

114 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for

short, 8IPC9).

3

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-

State.

4. After arguing the matter for some time, the learned

counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer only for

quashing Sections 114 and 143 of the IPC as they are non-

compoundable.

5. The case of the petitioner is that, the respondent

No.2-complainant filed a private complaint against ten

accused persons and the case was referred to the Police and

in turn, the Police have registered the F.I.R. and have filed

charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 143,

448, 341, 323, 504, 506 and 114 read with Section 149 of the

IPC. During pendency of the trial, respondent No.2 and

accused persons have entered into compromise petition under

Section 320(2) along with Section 320(8) of the Cr.P.C. and

the Magistrate acquitted the accused persons for the offences

punishable under Sections 143, 448, 341, 323, 504 and 506

4

read with Section 149 of the IPC and they were set at liberty.

However, while passing the order, the Magistrate has left out

the provisions of Section 114 of the IPC, which is non-

compoundable and though Section 143 of the IPC is non-

compoundable, but it was compounded. Therefore, the

petitioner is before this Court for quashing Sections 114 and

143 of the IPC.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended

that the Magistrate has rightly allowed the compromise

application and permitted the accused persons to compound

the offences, but left out the provisions of Section 114 of the

IPC, which is non-compoundable and failed to verify the

offence under Section 143 of the IPC, which is also non-

compoundable as per the Cr.P.C.

7. Upon hearing the arguments and perusal of the

order of compromise dated 3-2-2021, the Trial Court allowed

the application and acquitted the accused persons for the

offences punishable under Sections 143, 448, 341, 323, 504

5

and 506 read with Section 149 of the IPC. As per Section

114 of the IPC, any person is present when the act or offence

for which he would be punishable in consequence of the

abetment of offence is committed, he shall be deeme