Premachandran v. Ravindhar

Abhay Singh SengarCase SummaryLeave a Comment

Premachandran v. Ravindha

Premachandran v. Ravindhar
In the Kerala High Court
Crl. M.C. No. 89 of 2013
Before Justice T.R. Ramachandran Nair
January 17, 2013

Relevancy of the case: Compounding of charges under Sec 77A of IT Act

Statutes & Provisions Involved

  • The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 43, 66, 77A)
  • The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 320)

Relevant Facts of the Case

  • The petitioners are accused of Section 43 r/w 66 of the IT Act, 2000.
  • This appeal is in regards to allow the compounding of charges as given under Section 77A of the IT Act.
  • They have approached the Court because the Investigation Officer is not responding to the plea of compounding the offences.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

  • Counsel for the petitioner referred to the case of Yesudas v. S.I. Of Police (2008 (1) KLT 245).
  • Para 17 of the aforesaid case states that-“17. The mere fact that the victim and/or the accused have the option of going before the police to report composition, it does not take away their right to approach the Magistrate seeking composition of offences falling under S.320(1) or 320(2) Cr.P.C. In such event, the Magistrate will certainly have to order notice to the Investigating Officer and after hearing him also appropriate decision will have to be taken by the learned Magistrate on the question of accepting the composition as also on the question of grant of leave under S. 320(2) Cr.P.C. Appropriate orders under S.320 Cr.P.C. will then have to be passed by the learned Magistrate.”

Final Decision

  • The Court said that the compounding of charges is permitted.
  • A new petition must be filed for the same.
  • Appropriate action shall be taken within 2 months.

 Personal Opinion

  • It can clearly be seen that the LEAs are not prompt when it comes to provisions of the IT Act, 2000. Section 77A clearly prescribes compounding of offences but the Investigating Officer here did not compound the cases and hence, the accused had to approach the court for the same.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *