Kunduri Srinivas Ramanujam, v. The State Of Telangana,

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA CRIMINAL M.P. No.1556 OF 2017 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.1592 OF 2017 COMMON ORDR:

This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioners - accused Nos.1 to 5 viz., Kunduri Srinivas Ramanujam, K.Govinda Rajulu, Smt.K.Sreedevi, Padma and Ajay Kumar, respectively, seeking to quash the proceedings against them in PRC.No.10 of 2016 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2.

Ms.Shilpa Naidu, learned counsel appearing for Sri K.Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that petitioner No.2, who is no other than the father of Petitioner No.1 and father-in-law of respondent No.2, is no more and he has filed a copy of the death certificate along with the material papers. Learned counsel would further submit that a decree of divorce was granted between petitioner No.1 and the de facto complainant/2nd respondent on 11.12.2015 in O.P.No.1651 of 2015 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad.

ASN,J CRL.P.No.1592_17

3. Compromise Petition in Criminal M.P. No.1556 of 2017 is filed by the de facto complainant under Section 320(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, along with her affidavit and the Joint Memo signed by both parties requesting to record the compromise in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the parties which is filed in the main petition, and to quash the present proceedings against the petitioners/accused.

4. Both parties as well as their learned counsel are present and the parties are identified by their respective counsel, Sri K.Srinivasa Reddy and Smt. K.S.G.Padmavathi. The parties have also produced photostat copies of their respective "Aadhaar Cards" in proof of their identity.

5. On being asked, the de facto complainant and the petitioners report that they have compromised the matter at the intervention of the elders and to that effect they have also filed the Memorandum of Undertaking referred to above entered into between the parties with certain terms and conditions signed and affirmed by both parties and request the Court to record the compromise and quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. Since both the parties have affirmed the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding referred to above and request to record the compromise and to quash the impugned proceedings against the petitioners and in view of the law declared by the Hon'ble

ASN,J CRL.P.No.1592_17 Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Criminal M.P. No.1556 of 2017 is allowed recording the compromise between the parties to enable them to live amicably.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings against the petitioners in PRC.No.10 of 2016 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. The original Memorandum of Undertaking between 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 February 22, 2017.

V v