KANTHA RAMEGOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor on the compromise petition filed by the petitioners and respondent No.2.

(2.) The learned Addl. SPP had raised objection to entertain the compromise petition mainly on the ground that the petitioner Nos. 3, 4. 5 and 6 (accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6) have criminal antecedents. The learned Addl.SPP has filed a memo furnishing the details of the cases wherein these accused are implicated on the charges under Sections 302, 307, 120(B), 353, 307 and 324 of IPC.

(3.) The question which arises for consideration is whether solely on account of criminal antecedents of the petitioners, the compromise arrived at between the parties in the present case could be rejected?