High Court for State of TelanganaCRLP/1461/2017allowed no costs

M.Ramesh, v. State Of Telangana,

2017-02-17A.Shankar Narayana3 pages

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION M.P. Nos.1442 AND 1443 OF 2017 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.1461 OF 2017 COMMON ORDR:

Criminal Petition No.1461 of 2017 is filed by the petitioners - accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 viz., M. Ramesh, Smt. Dimple Agarwal and Smt. Suman Agarwal, respectively, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.47 of 2016 on the file of XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar, arising out of First Information Report No.50 of 2013 of Pahadishareef Police Station, Cyberabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Criminal Petition M.P. Nos.1442 and 1443 of 2017 are filed by the de facto complainant, G. Ravinder Reddy, who is respondent No.2 in the Criminal Petition, along with his (1) affidavit, (2) Joint Memo and also (3) photostat copy of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 07.02.2017, filed in the Criminal Petition, signed and affirmed by both parties and their respective counsel, requesting to permit the parties to compromise the matter and to compound the offences against the petitioners, and consequently to quash the proceedings against the petitioners stating that with the intervention of

ASN,J Crl. P. No.1461 of 2017 the elders, they settled the matter between them, outside the Court, in terms of the compromise.

3. The de facto complainant and the petitioners as well as their counsel are present and the parties are identified by their respective counsel, Sri Pramod Singh and S. Sridhar. The parties have also produced photostat copies of their respective "Aadhaar Cards" in proof of their identity and also attested on the case bundle.

4. On being asked, the de facto complainant and the petitioners report that they have compromised the matter with the intervention of the elders, outside the Court, in terms of the compromise and to that effect they have also filed (1) affidavit of the de facto complainant,

(2) Joint Memo and (3) the Memorandum of Understanding, dated 07.02.2017, entered into between them and request the Court to record the compromise compounding the offences against the petitioners, and, consequently to quash the proceedings.

5. Since both the parties have affirmed the terms of the Joint Memo and the Memorandum of Understanding, referred to above, requesting to record the compromise compounding the offences against the petitioners and to quash the proceedings, and, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab1, Criminal Petition M.P. Nos.1442 and 1443 of 2017 are 1 2012 (10) SCC 303

ASN,J Crl. P. No.1461 of 2017 allowed recording the compromise between the parties in terms of the compromise and compounding the offences against the petitioners.

6. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allowed, at the admission stage itself, quashing the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.47 of 2016 on the file of XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar. The Joint Memo and the Memorandum of Understanding, referred to above, 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 17, 2017.