M.S. Malik, v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.P.M.P.No.1875 of 2015 in Crl.P.No.8666 of 2014 and Criminal Petition No.8666 of 2014 COMMON ORDER:

Defacto complainant and her counsel Sri T.Sharath are present. Accused No.1 and his counsel Sri T.Vamsheedhar Reddy are present. A2 to A5 are represented by A1, who is their GPA holder.

On the report given by the complainant the police of WPS, C C S , Hyderabad registered FIR No.22 of 2011 and after investigation laid charge sheet against A1 for the offences under Sections 498A, 325, 326 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in C.C.No.478 of 2013. In the charge sheet police have omitted A2 to A5 but however, learned XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, (Mahila Court) Hyderabad has taken cognizance of the offence against A1 and also A2 to A5 and registered as C.C.No.313 of 2011.

While so, the parties and their counsel present in the Court today and submitted that at the intervention of elders they have amicably resolved their disputes and agreed to live in a peaceful and harmonious manner and as per their agreement, defacto complainant and A1 agreed to obtain divorce by filing an application and present case is concerned, defacto complainant has no objection for quashment of proceedings against the accused and therefore, this Court may be pleaded to permit them to compound the offence and accordingly quash the proceedings

in the interest of justice.

Having regard to the above submission and in view of the fact that it is a matrimonial matter wherein the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and no useful purpose will be served in driving them to trial, and following the decision reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another[1] this petition is allowed and permission is accorded to the parties to compound the offence and proceedings in C.C.No.313 of 2011 on the file of XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, (Mahila Court) Hyderabad are hereby quashed in terms 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: 04.03.2015 Murthy [1] (2012) 10 SCC 303