APHC010138522010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY. THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1778 of 2010 Revision filed under Sections 397 & 401 of CrPC, Aggrieved by the Judgment and Sentence imposed in CC.No.210 of 2008 on the file of the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tenali dated 29.04.2010 as confirmed in CrI.A.No. 262 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FTC), Guntur at Tenali dated 29.09.2010. Between: 1. Kolapalli Subba Rao, S/o. Venkateswarlu, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Chakrayapalem, Kollipara Mandal, Guntur District. 2. Gajula Seetharamaiah, S/o. Nancharaiah, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Kucheilapadu, Vemuru Mandal, Guntur District. ...Petitioners/Appellants/Accused AND 1. The State of A P, the Sub- Inspector of Police, Vemuru Police Station, Guntur District, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., at Amaravati. ...Reapondent/Respondent/Complainant 2. Gajula Venkatappaiah, S/o.Seetharamaiah, aged about 46 years, R/o.D.No.3-5, Kucheilapadu, Vemuru Mandal, Bapatia (Guntur) District. i ^ ...2"^'Respondent/De-facto Complainant (Respondent No.2 is impleaded as per the Court Order dated 07.03.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in CRLRC No.1778 of 2010) lA NO: 2 OF 201 OrCRLRCMP 2605 OF 2010 Petition under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail by suspending the Judgment and Sentence imposed in CC.No. 210 of 2008 on the file of the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tenali dated 29.04.2010 as confirmed in CrI.A.No. 262 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FTC), Guntur at Tenali dated 29.09.2010, pending disposal oftheCrI.R.C. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI M N NARASIMHA REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1: Public Prosecutor Counsel for Respondent No.2: SRI MD. RAFI The Court made the following Order: APHC010138522010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3521] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1778/2010 Between: Kolapalli Subba Rao And Another, and Others ...PETITIONER{S) AND ...RESPONDENT The State Of A P Rep By Pp Counsel for the Petitioner{S): 1.M N NARASIMHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: Heard Sri M.N.Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohammed Rafi, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State. Sri M.N.Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel for the 2. petitioners submit that K.Subba Rao who is petitioner N0.I/AI in 2 this case died and death certificate in proof of the same was also filed, in which it was certified that K.Venkata Subba Rao died on 11.05.2014. In that view of the matter, the case against petitioner 3. No.l/AI/K.Subba Rao is dismissed as abated. The Revision is filed against the concurrent findings of the 4. Courts below, for the alleged offence under Section 324 read with 34 IRC. A Joint Memo dated 28.02.2025 is filed by respondent No.2 5. and petitioner No.2 along with Memorandum of Terms of Compromise containing signatures of petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2. 6. It is averred in the said Joint Memo that petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 have been leading their life happily and harmoniously and both are helping each other in their agricultural operations. Petitioner No.2 is elder brother of respondent No.2 in relation. Therefore, they were constrained to settle the dispute with an understanding to lead their life in peace and harmony in brotherhood in village and requested this Court to set-aside the sentence imposed by the Court below. 3 Though Section 324 IPC is non-compoundable, considering 7. the facts and circumstances in an appropriate case, the case can be compounded, as per the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Vs. LMuniswamy reported in (1977) 2 see 699. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case where petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 are cousins and living neighbours and carrying out their agricultural operations day in and day out, any dispute or the physical injury caused a scare on the life of PW1, can be wiped out, if the case is compromised, as per the wish of PW1/respondent No.2, who voluntarily appeared before this Court and urged this Court to consider the joint memo. 8. as Considering the facts and circumstances of the present Section 324 IPC is non-compoundable, as per the 9. case, even Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred supra, the case is compromised in between petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 and the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court and the learned Appellate Court are hereby set-aside. Petitioner No.2 is acquitted. 4 10 Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. Sd/- V DIWAKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The II Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tenali, Guntur District. 2. The XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FTC), Tenali, Guntur District. 3. The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Tenali, Guntur District 4. The Sub- Inspector of Police, Vemuru Police Station, Guntur District. 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi[OUT] 6. One CC to Sri M N Narasimha Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri Md. Rafi, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CD Copies TK vna HIGH COURT DATED;07/03/2025 ORDER CRLRC No. 1778 of 2010 3 2 5 JUL 2025 to ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE