STATE BY Vs. SENKANIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal and the Criminal Revision Case are directed against the order passed by the learned II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Coimbatore dtd. 14/9/2000, acquitting the respondents/accused. The Appeal has been filed by the State, against the order of acquittal and the Revision case has been filed by PW.1/de-facto complainant, against the common order of acquittal.

(2.) When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the Revision petitioner/de-facto complainant/PW.1 would submit that the matter has been compromised between the parties and that during the pendency of the appeal and revision, respondents 2, 5, 12 and 13 have passed away and he would further submit that the revision petitioner/defacto complainant is not interested in pursuing the revision and seek to withdraw the revision.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioner as well as the respondents would further submit that the parties, have, during the pendency of the above Crl.R.C.No.1210 of 2000, settled their disputes, which is also the subject matter of the above proceedings and further there are also connected suit which was pending between the parties in O.S.No.1193 of 1993 on the file of the learned District Judge, Coimbatore and they have also filed a compromise petition in I.A.No.206 of 2013, pursuant to which, a final decree has been passed in I.A.No.910 of 2006. Based on the Joint Memo filed by the petitioner and the 1st respondent/main accused, the petitioner had sought for withdrawal of the above Crl.R.C.No.1210 of 2000. This Court enquired the revision petitioner, who is present before this Court today and he submitted that he is not interested in pursuing with the revision. In view of the same, Crl.R.C.No.1210 of 2000 is dismissed as withdrawn and now, the State appeal has to be decided. In view of the demise of the respondents 2, 5, 12 and 13, the appeal and the revision stands abated against them.