B.Narsing Rao, v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2018 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5866 OF 2018 ORDER:

I.A.Nos.1 and 2 These miscellaneous petitions are filed under Section 320

(2) and (6) Cr.P.C seeking leave to compound the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of S.Cs. and S.Ts (POA) Act and Section 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short "I.P.C.") as the matter is settled outside the Court and they entered into compromise and filed joint memo along with the compromise petition. Defacto complainant and the petitioners/accused are also present and they are identified by their counsel and Public Prosecutor, produced Photostat copies of aadhar cards in proof of their identity. When terms of compromise are explained in vernacular language, they are admitted to be true and correct. On enquiry the parties stated that they settled the issue outside the Court due to intervention of elders and well-wishers and they wanted to lead peaceful life.

In "Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.1" the Apex Court held that depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case, the High Court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., however before exercising such power, High Court must have due regard to nature and gravity of crime and its social impact. It is further held that heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

MSM,J Crlp_5866_ 2018 could not be fittingly quashed even though victim or victim's family and offender have settled dispute. Such offences were not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly any compromise between victim and offender in relation to offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; could not provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences.

By applying the principle laid down in the above judgment, and as the offence committed by the petitioners/accused is not against the society, permission is granted to compound the offence. Hence, compromise is recorded in terms of the joint memo filed along with this petition. Accordingly, these petitions are ordered. Crl.P.No.5866 OF 2018 In view of the orders passed in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2018, the present criminal petition case is allowed in terms of the joint compromise memo. No costs.

Registry is directed to annex a copy of the joint memo to this order.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand dismissed.

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 12.06.2018 Ksp