Palli Vinod Babu v. The State Of A.P

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1225 OF 2017 ORDR:

The present Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code'), is filed by the petitioner/complainant, requesting to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.84 of 2016 of Bhimavaram I-Town P.S., West Godavari District.

2.

Strangely, the petitioner is no other than the complainant, at whose instance the criminal action was initiated for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B read with Section 34 of I.P.C. on his complaint referred to the Station House Officer, Bhimavaram I-Town P.S., under Section 156 (3) of the Code against the respondents 2 to 8, who are arraigned accused Nos.1 to 7, now seeking the instant relief.

3.

Heard Sri P.V.L. Bhanu Prakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner/de facto complainant; and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Andhra Pradesh, and Sri G.V.S. Mehar Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 8. 4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in fact, the respondents 5 & 6 have got a writ petition filed in W.P. No.2554 of 2013 on the file of this Court got it withdrawn. The letter written by them to the learned counsel on record, is placed on record,

and so also the letter addressed to the Registrar (Judicial) referring to the order passed by this Court dismissing W.P. No.2554 of 2013 as withdrawn on 20.1.2017.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the matters between the parties have been compromised and in fact the complainant is now staying at Rajahmundry and that has been the reason that the learned counsel drawn attention of this Court to the settlement entered into between the parties i.e., the de facto complainant/ petitioner and the respondents 2 to 8 herein in O.S.No.141 of 2014 on the file of I-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, and, therefore, it is his submission to accede to the request of the de facto complainant.

6.

The learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 8, who are accused Nos.1 to 7, has not disputed as to what all contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7.

Therefore, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the First Information Report against the respondents 2 to 8 herein - accused Nos.1 to 7 in Crime No.84 of 2016 on the file of Bhimavaram I-Town P.S., West Godavari District.

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

__________________________ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J Dt. 28.03.2017 gbs