Akshay Satyavarapu S/O S.Nagesh v. The State Of Telangana,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.P.M.P.No.2447 of 2015 in Crl.P.No.2236 of 2015 and Criminal Petition No.2236 of 2015 COMMON ORDER:

The defacto complainant and her counsel Sri K.Venu Madhav are present. A.1 to A.4 and their Counsel Sri P. Lakshma Reddy are present.

On the report given by the defacto complainant, the Police of WPS, Begumpet, North Zone, Secunderabad registered Crime No.180 of 2013 and after investigation laid charge sheet against A.1 to A.4 for the offences under Sec.498-A, 323 r/w 34, 506, 420 of IPC and Sec.4 of D.P Act and learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad took cognizance of the case and registered as C.C.No.6 of 2014.

While-so, both parties and their counsel present in Court today and submitted that at the intervention of elders, they have amicably resolved all their disputes including their present criminal proceedings and as per the terms of the said compromise, the defacto complainant and A.1 obtained divorce on 04.02.2015 in Divorce O.P.No.457 of 2013 on the file of Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad and the maintenance claim of the defacto complainant was also settled whereby the A.1 agreed to pay Rs.30 Lakhs towards full maintenance claim of the defacto complainant and he gave two D.Ds bearing Nos. 549482 and 549483 dated 03.02.2015 drawn from Cosmos Cooperative Bank Limited, M.G.Road, Secunderabad and the defacto complainant kept those two D.Ds with her elders and in view of it, she has no objection for quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.6 of 2014 on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad and hence this Court may be pleased to accord permission to them to compound the offence and quash the proceedings accordingly in

the interest of justice.

Having regard to the above said submission of the parties and in view of the fact that it is a matrimonial matter wherein the parties have amicably settled their disputes and also considering that no useful purpose will be served even if the parties are driven to trial since the parties have compromised and following the decision reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, this petition is allowed and permission is accorded to the parties to compound the offence and consequently proceedings in C.C.No.6 of 2014 on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad are hereby quashed in the light of joint memo filed by the parties.

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: 20.03.2015 scs