STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. H S SRINIVASA IYENGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a State Appeal preferred against the judgement in C.C. No. 31/1990 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hassan dated 4-5-1991 acquitting the accused (respondents) of the offences under Ss. 498-A read with S, 34, IPC, 432 r/w S. 34, 323 r/w S. 34 and 114, IPC.

(2.) This appeal came up for hearing on the question of admission on 15-3-1996. The complainant his daughter who is alleged to have been ill-treated and the accused, filed a compromise petition I.A. II in this Court under S. 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr. P.C.' for short) and prayed for permission to compound the offences. The complainant, who is the father of Nagalakshmi and the accused Nos. 1 and 2 were present before Court in person and admitted the execution of the compromise petition. The accused Nos. 3 and 4 were not present in person. They appeared through their Counsel Sri Ashok Haranahalli, who also admitted the execution of the compromise petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents argued that except the offence under S. 498-A, IPC, the other offences alleged are compoundable and even with regard to the offence under S. 498-A, IPC, considering the fact that it is a matrimonial offence and since the parties have entered into a compromise, and C.W. 2 Nagalakshmi is living along wife the accused amicably, as a special case, permission may be granted to compound the said offence and the compromise petition may be accepted. In support of his argument that such permission can be granted, he relied upon a decision reported in (1990) 3 Kant LJ (Supp) 491 State of Karnataka v. Basavaraju a Bench decision. Hon'ble Mr. Justice D. P. Hiremath and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Ramachandraiah, while considering a similar situation relating to an offence under S. 498-A, IPC in that case, held as follows :-