Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

RAMGOPAL & ANR. versus STATE OF M.P. & ANR.

Decided
30 July 2010
Judges listed
MARKANDEY KATJU, T.S. THAKUR (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Hearing Adjourned

Citations

Official
[2010] 9 S.C.R. 354 · 2010 INSC 458
Also cited as
  • (2010) 13 SCC 540 (9 citing judgments)

Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.

Not shown
2 other citation strings that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Paragraph numbering in our copy is uncertain (unnumbered_in_numbered_era). Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Delay condoned. Issue notice.

p. 355, margin A

The petitioners herein were convicted, inter alia, under Section 326 IPC. We understand that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement. However, in view of the fact that the offence mentioned in Section 326 is a non-compoundable offence, we cannot straightway acquit the petitioners the settlement between the parties, notwithstanding.

p. 355, margin B

There are several offences under the IPC that are currently non-compoundable. These include offences punishable under Section 498-A and Section 326 of the IPC. Some of such offence can be made compoundable by introducing a suitable amendment in the statute. We are of the opinion that the Law Commission of India could examine whether a suitable proposal can be sent to the Union Government in this regard. Any such step would not only relieve the courts of the burden of deciding cases in which the aggrieved parties have themselves arrived at a settlement, but may also encourage the process of reconciliation between them. We, accordingly, request the Law Commission and the Government of India to examine all these aspects and take such steps as may be considered feasible.

p. 355, margin C

The Secretary General of this Court shall forthwith send a copy of this order to the Law Commission of India as well as to the Law Secretary to the Government of India. The Law Secretary is requested to place a copy of this order before the Hon'ble Minister of Law & Justice, Union of India. R.P. Special Leave Petition adjourned.

p. 355, margin F