Pammi Satish Chandra, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.P.M.P.No.16934 of 2014 in Crl.P.No.2587 of 2013 and Crl.P.No.2587 of 2013 Common Order:

The de facto complainant and her counsel Sri M.Ajay Kumar are present. Accused Nos.2 to 4 and their counsel Sri V.V.L.N.Sarma are present. Accused No.1 -Pammi Satish Chandra is represented by A.3-Pammi Nageswara Rao through General Power of Attorney dated 24.02.2014 as A.1 on account of his employment is residing in Paris.

Heard both sides and perused the petition.

The Police of Kothagudem I Town P.S have filed charge sheet in FIR No.84 of 2012 against the accused for the offences under Section 498A IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the learned I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Kothagudem took cognizance of the same and registered in C.C.No.221 of 2012.

Now the submission of both sides is that at the intervention of elders, both parties have settled the disputes among themselves and hence they are filing compromise petition and the same may be accepted and compromise may be recorded.

Having regard to the above submission and

considering the fact that it is a matrimonial matter where the parties have amicably settled their disputes and no useful purpose will be served even if the parties are driven to trial since they compromised and following the decision reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another[1], permission is accorded and this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and compromise is recorded and consequently the proceedings in C.C.No.221 of 2012 on the file of I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Kothagudem are hereby quashed. In the result, both the petitions are accordingly disposed of.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J Date: 22-01-2015 scs [1] (2012) 10 SCC 303