RAKESH PONNAPPA S/O. MITTU POOVAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ULSOORGATE WOMEN POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560 002 AND 2. SMT. RASHMI W/O. RAKESH PONNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for II - respondent has filed a joint memo reading as hereunder: -

(2.) THE learned HCGP relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2011 AIR SCW 305 (in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another) would submit that this Court by exercising its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot convert a non -compoundable offence to a compoundable offence. The learned HCGP would submit that in the case of Gian Singh the Supreme Court has held that the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in AIR 2009 SC 428 (in the case of Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another); (in the case of B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana) and AIR 2008 SC (Supp) 1171 ; Manoj Sharma v. State and others) do not appear to be correctly decided. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh's case has directed that the matter be placed before the larger Bench to consider the correctness of the aforesaid three decisions.

(3.) THE learned counsel would submit that in the case of Shiji alias Pappu and others vs. Radhika and another (a subsequent judgment), the Supreme Court has referred to the earlier judgments reported in AIR 2009 SC 428 (in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another); B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another, AIR 2003 SC 1386 and AIR 2008 SC (Supp) 1171 (in the case of Manoj Sharma vs. State and others). Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that notwithstanding the fact that the case pending before the Court below involves non -compoundable offences there is no need to continue with the proceedings as the parties have settled matrimonial disputes.