Fact Of Amicable Settlement Can Be A Relevant Factor For Purpose Of Reducing Quantum Of Sentence: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that the fact of amicable settlement can be a relevant factor for the purpose of reduction in the quantum of sentence. 

In this case, one of the accused was convicted under Sections 324 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code with a sentence of three months' rigorous imprisonment, and the other accused was convicted under Sections 307 and 341 of IPC and imposed with a sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment. The High Court upheld the conviction recorded by the Trial Court.

During the pendency of appeal before the Supreme Court, the parties entered into amicable settlement. However, the court noted that the offences cannot be compounded since Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not encapsulate Section 324 and 307 IPC under its list of compoundable offences. The bench referred to some earlier judgments viz. Ram Pujan v. State of UP [(1973) 2 SCC 456] and Ishwar Singh v. State of MP [(2008) 15 SCC 667], and some others,  in which compromise between parties were taken note of  to reduce the sentence of the convicts even in serious non-compoundable offences. In this context, the bench comprising Justices NV Ramana, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose observed: 

"Notwithstanding thereto, it appears to us that the fact of amicable settlement can be a relevant factor for the purpose of reduction in the quantum of sentence."
"Given this position of law and the peculiar circumstances arising out of subsequent events, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to take a sympathetic view and reconsider the quantum of sentences awarded to the appellants."

The court also noticed that 1) parties to the dispute have mutually buried their hatchet 2) That at the time of the incident, the victim was a college student, and both accused too were no older than 20­22 years 3) They have no other criminal antecedents, no previous enmity, and today are married and have children 4) They have served a significant portion of their sentences.  Considering all these unique factors, including the compromise between the parties, we deem it appropriate to reduce the quantum of the sentence imposed on the appellants, the bench said while reducing the sentence to the period already undergone by them.

Case: Murali vs. State [CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.24/2021]

Coram: Justices NV Ramana, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose

Citation: LL 2021 SC 11

Click here to Read/Download Order

Read Order