Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Chandra Binu @ Binu vs State Of Kerala on 2 July, 2014
ê= 1
ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.3 SECTION IIB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 375/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28/06/2013
in CRLA 1648/2007 passed by the High Court Of Kerala At Ernakulam)
CHANDRA BINU @ BINU Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondent(s)
(With office report)
Date : 02/07/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C NAGAPPAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gireesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr.Sriram P., Adv.
Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni ,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Shekhar G.Devasa, Adv.
Mrs. Sudha Gupta ,Adv.
Mr. V.Shyamvan, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
Signature Not Verified
(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Digitally signed by Shashi Sareen Date: 2014.07.16 Court Master Court Master 04:22:33 ALMT Reason:
( The Signed Order is placed on the file.) 2 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1301 OF 2014 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 375 of 2014) CHANDRA BINU @ BINU ... Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF KERALA ... Respondent(s) O R D E R Leave granted.
The appellant was charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 447, 376 read with Section 511 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code before the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast track-II,Thiruvananthapuram who found him guilty of the said offences and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years for the offence punishable under Section 447 and five years for the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC. A fine of Rs. 15,000/- was also imposed upon the appellant with the direction that in default of payment he shall undergo a further 3 imprisonment for a period of one year. In case the fine amount was realised, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was directed to be disbursed to the victim as compensation.
In an appeal filed before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 was set aside and the appellant instead convicted for an offence punishable under Section 354, IPC, a sentence of two years’ rigorous imprisonment besides a fine of Rs. 25,000/- was for that offence awarded to the appellant. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of four months and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- directed to be paid to the victim if the amount of fine was realised. The conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 447 was however confirmed.
When this appeal initially came up for preliminary hearing before us on 31.01.2014, our attention was drawn by learned counsel for the appellant to an affidavit filed by Smt. Sreekala, the alleged victim, in para 5 whereof it was stated that she had resolved her differences with the appellant. An application seeking permission to compound the offence in the light of the said amicable settlement was also 4 filed by the appellant under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C.
By our order dated 10.03.2014, we had directed the Trial Court to verify the genuineness of the alleged settlement in terms of the affidavit allegedly sworn by the complainant-Sreekala D/o Girija. The Trial Court was directed to summon the appellant as also the victim and record their statement on the subject after due and proper identification and submit a report to this court expeditiously. The Trial Court has in compliance with the said direction submitted a report from a reading whereof it appears that the Trial Court had not only summoned the appellant and the alleged victim but also taken steps to establish their identity by reference to documentary evidence. The Trial Court also appears to have recorded the statement of the alleged victim in which the victim is alleged to have supported the settlement between the appellant on the one hand and victim on the other. The affidavit filed before this Court was also found by the Trial Court to be genuine as the victim had accepted her signatures on the same.
In the circumstances, therefore, we have no doubt that the parties have indeed amicably settled the matter. It is not disputed that offence punishable under Section 354, IPC is in terms of Section 320 of the table thereunder compoundable with the permission of 5 the Court provided, the victim of the assault agrees to such composition. Similarly offence punishable under Section 447 is also compoundable under the said provisions. The victim of the assault in the present case has consented to the composition of the offence as is evident from the affidavit filed by her as also the report submitted by the Trial Court after recording their statement.
In the totality of the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view the fact that the parties have indeed reconciled their differences and agreed to bury the hatchet we see no reason why permission to compound the offence should be declined. We accordingly allow the application for composition and consequently set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant as recorded by the courts below and acquit the appellant of the charges framed against him. Since the appellant is on bail, the bail bonds shall stand discharged.
......................J. (T.S.THAKUR) ......................J. (C.NAGAPPAN) New Delhi, July 2nd, 2014.