Dilawar Mahmood , Syed Dilawer v. The State Of Telangana

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION M.P. Nos.407 AND 408 OF 2017 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.424 OF 2017 COMMON ORDER Petitioner Nos.1 to 4 and the de facto complainant, who is respondent No.2 are present and they are identified by their learned counsel respectively.

Petitioner No.1 is the husband of respondent No.2 - de facto complainant; petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are her in-laws and petitioner No.4 is her brother-in-law.

Respondent No.2 - de facto complainant filed Crl.P.M.P. Nos.407 and 408 of 2017 along with her affidavit and joint memo signed by both the parties and their respective counsel, seeking to permit her to compound the offence in FIR No.237 of 2016 of Rein Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad; and to record the compromise as per the terms of joint memo and to quash the aforesaid FIR. Perused the affidavit and the joint memo filed by both the parties.

The petitioners and respondent No.2 - de facto complainant entered into compromise concerning the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 420 read with Section 34 IPC.

ASN,J Crl.P.M.P. Nos.407 and 408 of 2017 in/and Crl.P. No.424 of 2017 Since both the parties have affirmed the contents of joint memo, the compromise is recorded as it is a matrimonial dispute and falls within the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab1.

In view of the above circumstances, Criminal Petition M.P. Nos.407 and 408 of 2017 are allowed and, consequently, the present Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings against the petitioners - Accused Nos.1 to 4 in F.I.R. No.237 of 2016 of Rein Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad. The joint memo filed by the parties shall form part of the record.

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

___________________________ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J January 31, 2017.

Mgr

1. (2012) 10 SCC 303