The acquittal of accused is permissible when the defacto complainant reconciles and no grievance persists against them, despite initial convictions.

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 in C.C.No.712/2000 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg. They were convicted and sentenced by the learned Magistrate for the commission of offences under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 323 and 332 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860. Though the petitioners challenged the above verdict before the Sessions Court, Kasargod, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who considered the above appeal, declined to interfere with the findings of the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, confirming the conviction awarded and the sentence imposed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the courts below, the petitioners are here before this Court with this revision. 2. During the course of proceedings in this revision, PW1/defacto complainant/injured swore an affidavit dated 02.12.2025 stating that he is not having any subsisting grievance as against the petitioners herein, since the matter has been amicably settled with them. PW1 stated in that affidavit that he has no objection in setting aside the concurrent findings of conviction and sentence passed against the petitioners herein. PW1 also gave a similar statement to the Investigating Officer.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

4. The prosecution case pertains to a physical assault perpetrated upon PW1, on 22.07.2000, at about 6.30 p.m., while PW1 was discharging his official duty as a Police Constable. The allegation in the Final Report was that the first accused caught hold of PW1 by his shirt and hit him with a stone. As against the second accused, the allegation was that he caught hold of the neck of PW1 during the course of assault by the accused. Against the other accused, the allegation was that they were also members of the unlawful assembly formed for physically assaulting PW1.

5. It appears from the case records that the substantial allegation about inflicting hurt upon PW1 is directed against the first accused, who is not a party in this revision petition. The other accused, including the petitioners herein, are fastened with the criminal liability by invoking Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code , stating the reason that all of them were part of the unlawful assembly, which mounted physical attack upon the defacto complainant. Now that the issue has been amicably settled between PW1 and the petitioners herein. PW1 has made it clear in his affidavit as well as the statement given to the Investigating Officer that the conviction and sentence against the petitioners are to be set aside since the first accused, who was the main culprit in the crime, is now no more, and as against the petitioners herein, he is not having any subsisting grievance. The elapse of more than 25 years from the date of offence, as well as the cordial relationship with the petitioners as the natives of the place where PW1 resides, are stated as the reason which prompted PW1 to forgive the criminal acts attributed against the petitioners. Having regard to the above development in the case, it appears to be necessary to meet the ends of justice that the concurrent findings of the courts below convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the commission of the aforesaid offences, are to be set aside.

In the result, the revision stands allowed as follows:

1) The concurrent findings of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg, and the Additional Sessions Court (ADHOC) III, Kasargod, in C.C.No.712/2000 and Crl.Appeal No.231/2004, convicting and sentencing the petitioners for the commission of offences under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 323 and 332 r/w Section 149 IPC , are hereby set aside.

2) The petitioner