Uppuluri Sasi Kumar, S/O. Ram Prasad v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.P.M.P.No.1193 of 2015 in Crl.P.No.1115 of 2015 and Criminal Petition No. 1115 of 2015 COMMON ORDER:

The de-facto complainant and her counsel Sri J.S.Raju are present. Accused and their counsel Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana are present.

On the application filed by de-facto complainant, DVC No.68 of 2011 was registered on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the same is pending. While so, now, the parties have submitted that at the intervention of elders they have amicably settled their disputes. De-facto complainant and first respondent who is her husband, have obtained divorce in OP No.903 of 2012 on 25.03.2013 and maintenance claim of the defacto-complainant is concerned, accused No.1 paid her Rs.5 lakhs in three demand drafts: bearing No.810311, dated 13.01.2015 for Rs.1 lakh; bearing No.810391 dt.24.12.2015 for Rs.2 lakhs and bearing No.810392 dt.24.12.2015 for Rs.2 lakhs drawn on State Bank of India, Vijayarai Branch and as such permission may be accorded to them to compound the case and record the compromise and consequently proceedings in DVC.No.68 of 2011 may be quashed.

Having regard to the above submission of the parties and considering the fact that it is a matrimonial matter and parties

have amicably settled their disputes and no useful purpose will be served if the parties are driven to trial, and relying upon the decision reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another[1] this petition is allowed and permission is granted to compound the case and compromise is recorded and consequently the proceedings in DVC No.68 of 2011 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are hereby quashed. In the result, both the petitions are accordingly allowed.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J Date: 16.02.2015 Murthy [1] (2012) 10 SCC 303)