N lodged a report with the police against H, the father of P, a minor girl of 17 years, alleging that the house of H was visited by persons of bad repute and that P had immoral relations with them. H filed a complaint… It was contended on behalf of N that the previous acquittal was a bar. Decide

Question: N lodged a report with the police against H, the father of P, a minor girl of 17 years, alleging that the house of H was visited by persons of bad repute and that P had immoral relations with them. H filed a complaint about defamation against N, but it was compounded by the accused tendering apology. Subsequently, P filed a complaint about defamation in respect of the same matter against N. It was contended on behalf of N that the previous acquittal was a bar. Decide. [D.J.S. 1991]

Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [N lodged a report with the police against H, the father of P, a minor girl of 17 years, alleging that the house of H was visited by persons of bad repute and that P had immoral relations with them. H filed a complaint… It was contended on behalf of N that the previous acquittal was a bar. Decide.]

Answer

According to Section 320(8) of the CrPC, the composition of an offence shall have the effect of an acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded. The effect is automatic. Wherever composition of an offence takes place it has an instantaneous effect of statutory acquittal of the accused. The Supreme Court in Rajinder Singh Kharayat And … v. State Of Uttarakhand & Another, on 15 October 2019 held that once permission is granted to compound the offence, the effect would be the acquittal of the accused in respect of the offence compounded, by virtue of Section 320(8) of the CrPC.

The provision contained in Section 300(1) of the CrPC is mainly based on the doctrine of double jeopardy. The rule against double jeopardy provides the foundation for the pleas of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict. Section 300 of the CrPC incorporates the principle of autrefois acquit namely, that no one shall be punished or put in peril twice for the same matter. For the applicability of the rule of autrefois acquit three essential conditions have to be satisfied namely:

• there must have been a trial of the accused of the offence charged against him;
• the trial must have been by a Court of competent jurisdiction and
• there must have been a judgment or order of acquittal.

It has been held by the Lordships of the Supreme Court in Mohammad Safi v. State of W.B.[1966 AIR 69] as under: –

“These provisions are based upon the general principle of autrefois acquit recognised by the English Courts. The principle on which the right to plead autrefois acquit depends is that a man may not be put twice in jeopardy for the same offence. This principle has now been incorporated into Article 20 of the Constitution.”

Section 320(8) of the CrPC specifically incorporates the legislative provision of acquittal on the ground of compounding an offence with the leave of the Court and therefore that statutory acquittal, in my considered opinion, is good enough to constitute acquittal under Section 300 of the CrPC,

The Allahabad High Court in the matter of Mohammad Mansoor v. Hira Singh and another, [AIR 1959 All 627] has held that compromise of compoundable offence automatically results in acquittal, Magistrate cannot proceed with the trial and defer the decision on the question of alleged compromise, as upon acquittal further trial will be barred by Section 300(1) of the CrPC and the Magistrate is bound to decide the application for compromise expeditiously, he has no jurisdiction to defer the decision till the end of the trial and he must not proceed with the trial if it is barred by Section 300 of the CrPC.

So, applying the aforesaid decisions of the courts to the present case at hand it can be said that when H filed a complaint about defamation against N, it was compounded by the accused tendering apology for the subsequent complaint about defamation in respect of the same matter against N will be in violation of section 300 of CrPC and Article 20 of the Constitution.

In other words, the acquittal contemplated by virtue of sub-section (8) of Section 320 of the CrPC on the compounding of an offence, though it is before the conclusion of the full-dressed trial, and by virtue of composition of offence will be an acquittal of the offence of an accused person for the purpose of Section 300(1) of the CrPC.

---

Important Mains/Long Questions for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
2. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
3. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
4. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
5. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
6. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
7. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
8. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
9. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
10. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions
11. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part XI: Important Questions