IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.244/2019 BETWEEN:
K. Kadiravel, S/o. Late Kannayan, Aged about 44 years, R/at No.9, Revenue Land, Vysya Bank Colony, J.P.Nagara, 1st Phase, Bengaluru-560 098. ...Petitioner (By Sri.A.N.Radha Krishna, Advocate) AND:
Smt. Madamma, W/o. Late Darmalingam, Aged about 55 years, R/at No.157, 15th Main, 2nd Stage, Mahadeswaranagar, BTM Layout, II Stage, Bengaluru-560 076. ...Respondent (By Sri. M.Nagaraja, Advocate) This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the judgment and conviction and sentence dated 25.02.2017 passed by the XLIV Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru in C.C.No.18553/2012 convicting the appellant/accused for the offence p/u/s 500 of IPC and confirmed in judgment dated 23.01.2019 passed by the LIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.434/2017 and acquit the petitioner.
This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Sri. M. Nagaraja, learned counsel files a power on behalf of respondent.
2. The petitioner/accused – K. Kadiravel and the respondent/complainant – Smt. Madamma are present before the Court. They have filed an application under Section 320(2) and (6) read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., reporting compromise.
3. The said compromise petition has been signed by the petitioner, respondent and their counsels, wherein, it is stated that at the instance of elders, well- wishers and common friends, both the parties have resolved their disputes between them including the present one and the said offence is compoundable and they are compounding the said offences.
4. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and also their parties.
5. The present petitioner/accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 500 of IPC for defamation. The said petition can be compounded by the person, from whom the offences of defamation has been committed. The respondent, who is present before the Court is the person who has been defamed and she also accepts that the matter has been amicably settled between them and the same can be compromised as per the terms of compromise and the said petition may be allowed and the parties may be permitted to compromise.
6. The respondent submits that she has no objection to acquit the accused for the alleged offences.
7. In view of the said compromise, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Court of the 44th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C. No.18553/2012 dated 25.02.2017 and confirmed by the Court of the LIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City (CCH – 60) in Criminal Appeal No.434/2017 dated 23.01.2019 are set aside and the petitioner/accused is acquitted of the charges leveled against him.
8. The respondent/complainant also submits that she has no objection to refund the fine amount deposited by the petitioner/accused. Therefore, the Court below is directed to return the fine amount deposited by the petitioner/accused on proper identification and acknowledgment.
Accordingly, petition is allowed in terms of compromise of the petition.
In view of the compromise, I.A. No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration. Hence, the same is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE VBS