- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 173 OF 2019 BETWEEN: RAJU P R S/O RAGHAVAN AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT 1ST CROSS A K COLONY, S N NAGAR SAGAR - 577 401. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGENDRA NAIK R., ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA SAGAR TOWN POLICE STATION SAGAR - 577 401 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING THAT TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 02.01.2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.10024/2018 ON THE FILE OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRIC AND SESSIONS JUDGE SHIVAMOGGA SITTING AT SAGAR AND JUDGMENT AND CONVICTION PASSED IN C.C.NO.117/2016, DATED 16.08.2018 UNDER SECTION 341, 323, 363 AND 504 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAGAR AND ETC., Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER Accused is before this Court in this Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.117/2016 dated 16.08.2018 by the Court of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Sagar and the judgment and order passed in Criminal Appeal No.10024/2018 dated 02.01.2019 passed by the Court of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga sitting at Sagar. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner and the de-facto complainant, who is the victim in the present case have inter se settled their dispute amicably at the intervention of well-wishers and friends. He submits that they do not intend to continue their inter se dispute and therefore, an application is filed by the parties under Section - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 320(2) of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to permit the parties to compound the offence for which the petitioner has been convicted by the Courts below. He submits that the parties intend to give a quietus to their inter se dispute and live peacefully in future. De-facto complainant - P.W.1, who is present in-person before the Court submits that settlement between the parties is voluntary without there being any undue influence and coercion. 4. Allegation against the petitioner is that on 08.10.2025 at about 03.30 p.m., when P.W.1, Raghavendra H.R. was on his way towards Taluk Panchayath Office along with C.W.2, the petitioner obstructed the movement of P.W.1 and after abusing him in filthy language, assaulted him on his chest and also criminally intimidated him. It is under these circumstances, based on the first information received from P.W.1, FIR in Crime No.245/2015 was registered against the petitioner by Sagar Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 341, 323, 504, 353 and 506 of IPC and after completing investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. Petitioner was tried in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 C.C.No.117/2016 for the charge sheeted offences and was convicted by the trial Court for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 353 and 504 of IPC and acquitted for offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC. The said judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.117/2016 dated 16.08.2018 by the Court of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Sagar was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.10024/2018 by judgment and order dated 02.01.2019 passed by the Court of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga sitting at Sagar. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court. It is now brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner and P.W.1 have settled their inter se dispute and an application is filed before this Court with a prayer to permit the parties to compound the offences for which petitioner has been convicted and sentenced by the Courts below. It is brought to the notice of this Court by learned HCGP that offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC is non-compoundable. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasi Mohan Barman & another vs. State of Assam and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 another1 has observed that even in cases registered for non- compoundable offences, in which accused has been convicted, if settlement is reported and charges against the accused are not grave in nature, the Court can consider the settlement between the parties and reduce the sentence. 6. The application filed under Section 320(2) of Cr.P.C. by the parties is signed by the petitioner and the de-facto complainant No.1 and also by the learned advocate of the parties. 7. The same is taken on record. 8. In paragraph Nos.4 to 6 of the said application, it is stated as follows:- "4. It is submitted that due to misconception between both the parties, a complaint has been registered by the complainant against the Petitioner/Accused. The same has been registered by the Respondent Police in Crime No.245/2015. Now the both parties have settled the issue among themselves. If the permission is granted by this Hon'ble Court the accused are ready and willing to settle the issue by compounding the same. 5. The Complainant and Accused submits that there is no other case pending against Petitioner/Accused. The 1 (2008) 1 SCC 184 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 Complainant undertakes to close the issue by way of compromise. 6. There is no coercion or threat from any other person. The settlement is voluntary. On the advice of elders and well wishers of both the parties the Complainant and accused/Petitioner have agreed to settle the issues." 9. The allegation in the present case against the petitioner are not of grave in nature and in the background of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I am of the opinion that in view of the settlement arrived between the parties, if the order of sentence passed against the petitioner is modified, the same would serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the following:- ORDER i. The Criminal Revision petition is hereby partly allowed. ii. The judgment and order of conviction passed against the petitioner by the Courts below convicting him for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 353 and 504 of IPC is confirmed and the order of sentence passed against him is modified. iii. For the offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC, petitioner is sentenced to pay fine of ₹300/- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9017 CRL.RP No. 173 of 2019 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days. iv. For the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC, petitioner is sentenced to pay fine of `300/- and in default he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days. v. For the offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC, petitioner is sentenced to pay fine of `500/- and in default he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 weeks and; vi. For the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC, petitioner is sentenced to pay fine of `400/- and in default he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days. vii. Petitioner is granted four weeks time to deposit the fine amount before the trial Court, if not already deposited. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE MH/-