1 2025:CGHC:32351 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 954 of 2016 Satish Kumar Gota S/o Mansingh Gota Aged About 21 Years Health Worker, Preliminary Health Center Karaki, R/o New Hospital Kodekhurse, Police Station Kodekhurse, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kodekhurse, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate with the applicant – Satish Kumar Gota. For Respondent/State : Shri Sachidanand Yadav, P.L. For complainant : Shri Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL) Order on Board 11/07/2025 1. Heard on I.A.No.03/2025 filed under Section 359 (1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘B.N.S.S. 2023’) for permission to compromise and on I.A.No.02/2025 filed under Section 359 (1) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 for compromise filed by both the applicant and victim/complainant for compromise the matter and for acquittal of the applicant of the offence under Section 354 of the IPC. 2. The above compromise petitions have been filed jointly by the applicant and complainant/Victim, who appeared through Video Conferencing provided by Digitally signed by ANJANI KUMAR ALLENA Date: 2025.07.11 17:35:21 +0530 2 the District Legal Services Authority, Kanker Victim is identified by Shri Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate. 3. This revision has been preferred by the applicant against the judgment dated 07.09.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No.08/2013 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanupratappur, Dist. North Bastar Kanker whereby the appellate Court affirmed the judgment dated 24.09.2013 passed in Criminal Case No. 139/2012 by the JMFC, Bhanupratapur convicting the applicant under Section 354 of IPC and sentenced to RI for 6 months with fine of Rs.500/- and in default thereof, further RI for one month. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as for the victim jointly submit that the offence under Section 354 of IPC is compoundable with the permission of the Court, under Section 359 (2) of the B.N.S.S., corresponding to Section 320 (2) Cr.P.C. They further submit that both the applicant and the victim are working in same place and in order to keep the relations cordial between them, they are willing to settle the matter amicably and voluntarily. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has raised no objection while submitting that the offence under Section 354 of Cr.P.C. is compoundable. 6. In compromise petition dated 28.04.2025, it is mentioned by the complainant that she has settled the dispute amicably and further submits she entered the compromise voluntarily and on her own will with the applicant and that there is no pressure or fear from any third party. In support of this compromise petition, affidavits of the complainant and the victim have been filed. On being asked, victim/complainant submits that working place of both of them was one and the same, therefore, without any fear or pressure, she is voluntarily compounding the case. 7. Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the compromise petition filed under Section 359 (1) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 allowed and the 3 permission to compound the offence with the accused/applicant is granted to the victim/complainant. 8. On the basis of the matter being compounded between the parties and in view of Section 359 (8) of B.N.S.S. 2023 corresponding to Section 320 (8) of Cr.P.C., the applicant is acquitted of the offence under Section 354 of IPC. Since the applicant is reported to be on bail, therefore, his bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of provision of Section 437-A of Cr.P.C. 9. In view of what has been stated above, the revision stands disposed of. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE Anjani