IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

NAGARAJA B

S/O D.H. BABU, AGED 30 YEARS,

R/AT 17/1, K.M.LANE,

S.P.ROAD CROSS,

BENGALURU-560 002.

(NOW IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY)

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. A N RADHAKRISHNA., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY ULSOOR GATE POLICE,

Digitally signed by

DHARMALINGAM REPRESENTED BY

THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

Location: HIGH

COURT OF HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,

KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S. 374(2) CR.P.C., BY THE ADV.,

FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:10.12.2014 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FTC-XII, BANGALORE IN S.C.NO.393/2011 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A AND 306 OF IPC. AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR 2

(TWO) YEARS AND WITH FINE OF RS.5000/- FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 498(A) OF IPC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 10.12.2014 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court XII, Bengaluru City, in S.C.No.393/2011.

2. I.A.No.1/2025 is filed under Section 320 of Cr.P.C, read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., read with Section 359 of Cr.P.C., read with Section of 528 of BNSS 2023, in which it is stated as under:

"The Appellant has filed the accompanying Criminal Appeal, challenging the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned Fast Track XII, Bengaluru City in S.C. No. 393/2011, convicting the Appellant / Accused for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 306 Indian Penal Code.

2. The Appellant submits that, on the complaint lodgd by PW-1 a case was registered, proceeded with trial, and the Appellant is found guilty.

3. The Appellant and PW-4 submits that, PW-1 is no more. Since PW-1/ Complaint is no more and on his behalf, by showing interest in view of RUCHITHA.N., who is un-married girl, who is residing with Appellant / Accused, and the PW-4 only by taking initiation and filing this application for compromise.

4. Both parties submit that, both families by forgetting their difference are leading hormonious life.

5. It is also on the interest of RUCHITHA .N., who is an un-married girl.

6. Both parties submit that, although offences are non-compoundable, the fact of compromise may be taken for consideration, while disposing Appeal.

WHEREFORE, the Appellant and the PW-4 submit that, the fact of compromise, and facts of the case, affidavit may take into consideration, in the interest of justice."

3. Along with this application, an Affidavit of Smt.Vanajakshi, W/o of late K. B. Shivalingaiah, has been filed stating that she has been examined as PW4. Her husband was examined as PW1. Her husband is no more. The deceased-Mamatha B.S., is her daughter. The deceased gave birth to a girl child which was named Ruchitha N. She is now staying with the appellant/accused. Her marriage has to be performed. She is a senior citizen aged about 64 years. Her brother i.e., appellant only has to perform the marriage of her grand-daughter. The appellant and herself are leading harmonious life since several years by forgetting the differences between them. Her grand-daughter has attained marriageable age. The appellant only has to perform her marriage. There is nobody to look after her. Although the alleged offences are non-compoundable in nature, in view of the facts stated above, her family and accused's family are living harmoniously, these facts of compromise may be taken into consideration.

4. An Affidavit of Kum. Ruchitha N. D/o of Nagaraju B., is also filed in which she has stated that she is residing with her father, i.e., the appellant/accused. Her father is only looking after her. Nobody el