Gagan Agarwal S/O.Pradeep Agarwal v. Smt.Kunchala Bhargavi W/O.Shiva Krishna

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.P.M.P.No.12441 of 2014 in Crl.P.No.12148 of 2014 and Criminal Petition No.12148 of 2014 COMMON ORDER:

The defacto complainant and her counsel Sri Mohd.Isthiyaq Akbar are present. A.1 and his Counsel Sri V.Brahmaiah Chowdary are present. Upon the report given by the defacto complainant, the Police of Karkhana P.S registered a case in No.172 of 2014 against A.1 and A.2 for the offences under Sec.354, 342, 506 r/w 34 IPC with the allegation that A.1 entered in the house of defacto complainant in the absence of her husband and tried to outrage her modesty and when she tried to prevent him, he threatened her with dire consequences if she does not listen to him. Thereafter or so, A.1 and A.2 who is father of A.1, telephoned her and threatened her. The investigation is reported to be pending.

While-so, the parties and their Counsel present in Court today and submitted that at the intervention of elders, they have amicably resolved their disputes and the petitioner has no objection for quashing the proceedings against A.1 and in fact she already compounded the offence as against the A.2 vide order dated 20.09.2014 in Crl.P.No.11249 of 2014 and therefore, the Court may be pleased to accord permission to compound the offence and quash the proceedings in the interest of justice.

Having regard to the above said submission and considering the fact that the parties are known to each other and they have amicably resolved their disputes and want to live peacefully and no useful purpose will be served even if the investigation is ordered to be continued as the parties have compromised the issue 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 Crime No.172 of 2014 on the file of Karkhana P.S, 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