Bathula Netaji, v. State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.M.P.No.2109 of 2015 in Crl.P.No.1929 of 2015 and Crl.P.No.1929 of 2015 Common Order:

The de-facto complainant and his counsel Sri Raghu are present. Accused Nos. 1 to 4 and their counsel Sri T. Rajanikanth Reddy present. Heard both sides.

On the report given by de facto complainant, the Police of Sanjivareddy Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad, registered FIR No.296 of 2012 and after investigation laid charge sheet for the offences under Sections 498(A) and Section 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

While so, today the parties and their counsel appeared before this Court and submitted that at the intervention of elders, they have amicably resolved the disputes and as per the terms of the Agreement, the de facto complainant and A.1 proposed to obtain divorce and in fact, they have already filed divorce petition in HMOP No. 99 of 2014 before Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, for divorce on mutual consent and the same is pending and the maintenance claim of the de facto complainant is taken care and A.1 agreed to pay Rs.5,18,000/- to her and the said amount was kept in fixed deposit and the same will be paid to her at the time of obtaining divorce and in view of the aforesaid agreement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.202 of 2012 and therefore, this Court pleased to accord permission to the parties to compound the offence and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.202 of 2012 on the file of XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.

In view of the above submission and as the matter is a matrimonial dispute which was amicably resolved by the parties, and no useful purpose will be served even if they are driven to trial Court since the parties have amicably compromised and following the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab

and another (2012) 10 SCC 303), Crl.P.M.P.No.2109 of 2015 is allowed and permission is accorded to compound the case. Consequently, the Criminal Petition No.1929 of 2015 is allowed and the Proceedings in C.C.No. 202 of 2012 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, are quashed against the accused Nos. 1 to 4, as per the Compromise Memo filed by the parties. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 02-04-2015 eha