Muthyala Padma Rao Ravinder , M.K. Ravender, v. Smt. Gummadi Vittal Venela Vennela

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA Crl.P. M.P. No.787 OF 2017 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.830 OF 2017 COMMON ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the accused. The defacto complainant who is the petitioner herein and the respondents 1 to 4, who are accused are present.

Offences alleged to have committed by the accused are punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 IPC and 363/511 IPC. It appears that with a view to get the proceedings in C.C. No.417 of 2012 quashed, the present petition is filed, as they have no other alternative remedy, in view of the fact that the offences alleged by respondent No.2 are non-compoundable offences and the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab1 would govern the field.

Both the learned counsel Sri G.Tirupathi Reddy for the petitioner/defacto complainant and Sri P.Raja Sripathi Rao for the accused are present. They have identified their respective parties. It is stated that the 1st accused gifted the property as decided by the elders and the defacto complainant affirms it. 1 2012 (10) SCC 303

The memo filed by the parties contains signatures of both parties and their respective counsel and they affirm the contents of the joint memo and request to record the compromise.

The law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh1 attracts the fact-situation in the present case. Hence the Crl.P.MP.No.787 of 2017 is allowed as per the terms mentioned in the compromise memo.

Consequently, Crl.P.No.830 of is allowed quashing C.C.No.297 of 2015 on the file of VI Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Medchal. The terms of compromise memo entered between the parties shall form part of the record.

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

_________________________________ JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA 06.02.2017 dv