R. Satish Rasori S/O Narasaiah v. State

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO Crl.M.P.No.988 of 2015 in Crl.P.No.16567 of 2014 and Crl.P.No.16567 of 2014 Common Order:

The de-facto complainant and her counsel Smt.M.Suguna are present. Accused and his counsel Smt.S.A.V.Ratnam are present.

Heard both sides.

On the report given by the de-facto complainant the police of Women Police Station, Begumpet, North Zone, Hyderabad registered FIR No.101 of 2013 for the offences under Section 498A IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act and laid charge sheet against the accused and learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad took cognizance of the same and registered as C.C.No.257 of 2014.

While so, both the parties submitted that it is a matrimonial matter and at the intervention of elders both the parties have amicably settled their disputes and entered into a compromise, as per which, they are proposing to take divorce and in fact they have already filed divorce application-O.P.No.1473 of 2014 before the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad which is pending and the maintenance claim of the de-facto complainant is also taken care of and the accused agreed to pay Rs.3 lakhs and he already paid Rs.1 lakh through bankers cheque

No.917723 dated 08.10.2014 drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad, Malkajigiri Branch and Rs.1 lakh under another cheque bearing No.231049 dated 31-12-2014 and agreed to pay the balance amount of Rs.1 lakh at the time of obtaining decree of divorce and parties have also compromised the present criminal proceedings and the de-facto complainant agreed not to prosecute the same and she has no objection to quash the proceedings and therefore, permission may be accorded to them to compromise the matter and consequently proceedings in C.C.No.257 of 2014 may be quashed.

Having regard to the above said submission and considering the fact that it is a matrimonial matter and parties have amicably settled the issue, no useful purpose will be served even if the parties are driven to trial and following the decision reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another[1] the proceedings in C.C.No.257 of 2014 on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are hereby quashed.

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 10-02-2015

Murthy [1] (2012) 10 SCC 303)