Madras HC Acquits Three Men Convicted Of Attacking Speech-Impaired Man With Aruval After Parties Settle Civil Dispute

In brief

The question

1. Whether the appellants’ convictions could be set aside at the appellate stage in light of the parties’ compromise, although the convictions were for offences under Sections 452, 326 and 506(ii) of the IPC

The court held

The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court’s judgment of conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellants of all charges.

It also directed

It discharged their bail bonds and directed that the fines be refunded

01Facts

The prosecution alleged that, following a prior dispute, the appellants and a fourth accused entered the complainant’s home and attacked his son with an aruval, causing grievous injuries, and threatened the family

¶ 2 · p. 2

The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 452, 326 and 506(ii) of the IPC and imposed imprisonment and fines; the charge against the fourth accused had abated on his death

¶ 3, 5 · pp. 2–3

In the appeal, the appellants, complainant and victim jointly informed the High Court that they had settled their dispute and sought acquittal

¶ 7–9 · p. 4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appellants’ convictions could be set aside at the appellate stage in light of the parties’ compromise, although the convictions were for offences under Sections 452, 326 and 506(ii) of the IPC

¶ 7–12 · pp. 4–6

ii.2. Whether the nature of the dispute and the parties’ voluntary settlement justified acquitting the appellants

¶ 7–12 · pp. 4–6

03Law Applied

The Court relied on Ramgopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, noting that criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences or offences predominantly private in nature may, in appropriate cases, be annulled on the basis of a compromise even after trial or during an appeal against conviction

¶ 10–12 · pp. 5–6

It also referred to decisions of the Madras High Court applying that approach

¶ 10 · p. 5

The judgment does not identify a separate statutory provision as the basis for setting aside the convictions.

Provisions in the judgment · 4 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 374

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 452 Section 326 Section 506

04Reasoning

The Court accepted that the incident arose from a civil dispute and that the complainant and victim had voluntarily joined the appellants in seeking a settlement-based outcome

¶ 7–8 · p. 4

Applying the principle in Ramgopal and the cited High Court decisions, it considered the private nature of the dispute and the parties’ amicable settlement sufficient to set aside the convictions, notwithstanding that the matter had reached the appellate stage

¶ 10–12 · pp. 5–6