Allowed

Syed Junaid v. State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Feb 2020CRLRC/274/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Common order disposing of two criminal revision cases filed by the accused challenging a conviction under Sections 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court allowed the revisions following a settlement where the wife withdrew charges and a memorandum of understanding was recorded, resulting in the acquittal of the accused.

What did the court decide?

Imprisonment and fine quashed; accused acquitted; all criminal and civil cases withdrawn as per the Memorandum of Understanding.

Syed Junaid Vs State of Ap — Dowry and Cruelty | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

I.A.(SR).No.57148 of 2019 in Crl.R.C.No.273 of 2019 & I.A.(SR).No.57146 of 2019 in Crl.R.C.No.274 of 2019 &

¶3

Crl.R.C. Nos. 273 and 274 of 2019

¶4

COMMON ORDER:-

¶5

Since these two Criminal Revision Cases are interrelated and the parties are one and the same, these matters are taken up together for disposal by this Common Order.

¶6

While Crl.R.C. No.273 of 2019 is preferred by the accused challenging the Common Judgment dated 06.02.2019 in Crl.A.No. 656 of 2016, the Crl.R.C.No. 274 of 2019 is preferred by him challenging the same judgment in Crl.R.P.No. 52 of 2018.

¶7

As seen from the record, originally, the accused was tried in C.C.No. 292 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chilakaluripet. By its judgment dated 02.12.2016, the learned Magistrate, while convicting the accused and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC, acquitting him for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The accused filed Crl.A.No. 656 of 2016 assailing judgment of conviction while his wife preferred Crl.R.P.No. 52 of 2018 seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on the accused. By a Common Judgment dated 06.02.2019, the lower appellate

¶8

2 CPK,J

¶9

I.A(SR)_57148_2019 in Crl.RC_273_2019

¶10

¶11

I.A(SR)_57146_2019 in CrlRC_274_2019

¶12

& CrlRCs 273 and 274 of 2019

¶13

Court, while dismissing Crl.A.No. 656 of 2016 filed by the husband, allowed Crl.R.P.No.52 of 2018 filed by the wife enhancing the sentence of imprisonment from one year to two years and also the fine amount from Rs.1000/- to Rs.5000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Challenging the same the present two revision cases are filed by the accused.

¶14

Pending adjudication of these revision cases, the parties have settled their disputes and entered into compromise which led to filing of I.A.(SR).No. 57148 of 2019 in Crl.R.C.No. 273 of 2019 and I.A.(SR).No. 57146 of 2019 in Crl.R.P.No. 274 of 2019 seeking to record compromise and compound the offence in terms of Memorandum of Understanding dated 16.11.2019 by setting aside the conviction and enhanced sentence imposed against the petitioner.

¶15

Today when the matters are taken up for hearing, both the petitioner – husband and his wife are present. Smt.K.Sesharajyam, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the wife and Sri K.Chaitanya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-husband are present.

¶16

When examined, the wife stated that she has settled the dispute at the instance of the elders and has expressed no objection for acquitting the accused. Along with the Joint Memo, an affidavit of the wife of the accused is also filed wherein it is stated that at the instance of the elders

¶17

3 CPK,J

¶18

I.A(SR)_57148_2019 in Crl.RC_273_2019

¶19

& I.A(SR)_57146_2019 in CrlRC_274_2019

¶20

& CrlRCs 273 and 274 of 2019

¶21

and well-wishers, the matter has been settled and both the parties have entered into a compromise vide Memo of Under standing dated 16.11.2019. In support of their identification, xerox copies of Aadhaar Cards of both the husband and the wife are placed on record and they were identified by their counsel. Following are the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the parties.

¶22

i) It is agreed by the 1^st party to pay an amount of Rs.25 lakhs for the maintenance of boy and the 2^nd party with our consent. The said amount has been kept with the elders i.e. (1) M.S.Khalid, (2) Jidugu Mastan Rao (3) Syed Moulali. It is agreed that the said amount will be paid after withdrawing of all the above cases by the 2^nd party herein.

¶23

ii) The gold articles and other house-hold articles belonging to the 2^nd party have been returned to the 2^nd party by the 1^st party today.

¶24

iii) The case filed by the 2^nd party in Chilakaluripet Police Station and the cases pending in the Hon’ble High Court vide Crl.R.C.No. 273 of 2019 and Crl.R.C.No. 274 of 2019 are agreed to be withdrawn by the 2^nd party as per law.

¶25

iv) The M.C.No. 36 of 2016 and D.V.C.No. 7 of 2016 on the file of the Court of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chilakaluripet filed by the 2^nd party against the 1^st party have agreed to be withdrawn. Similarly, Crime No. 37 of 2019 pending on the file of Narasaraopet I Town Police Station has agreed to be withdrawn.

¶26

v) After the cases are withdrawn by the 2^nd party, the 1^st party has to deposit an amount of Rs.10 lakhs as Fixed Deposit in the name of the minor boy, the same shall be withdrawn by the minor boy after he attains the majority.

¶27

vi) Except the cases as stated above, it is agreed between the parties that no other cases or financial issues are pending between the parties. It is agreed between the parties that in

¶28

4 CPK,J

¶29

I.A(SR)_57148_2019 in Crl.RC_273_2019

¶30

¶31

I.A(SR)_57146_2019 in CrlRC_274_2019

¶32

& CrlRCs 273 and 274 of 2019

¶33

future one should not interfere with the other’s life and create any difficulties and they can live as they like. In future both of us should not file any civil or criminal cases against each other. We have agreed to relinquish our lives against each other.

¶34

Among us the 1^st party has agreed to cooperate for taking “Kullanama” by the 2^nd party in the presence of Government Khazi.”

¶35

Having regard to the above, I.A.(SR).Nos. 57146 of 2019 and 57148 of 2019 are allowed. Consequently, these two Criminal Revision Cases are allowed in terms of the compromise recorded in Memorandum of Understanding, dated 16.11.2019. Consequently, the accused stands acquitted. No order as to costs.

¶36

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending,

¶37

shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶38

____________________ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J 13.02.2020

¶39

bcj

Syed Junaid v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Junaid v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Venkata Rami Reddy, Prakasam Dt., Vs Kandi Lakshmi Devi, Krishna and 2 Otrs, Rep Pp.

Immidisetty Ramaiah, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp.

Bhagyamma Vs the State of A.P. and Another

V. Maheswari, Vs Vanam Gopal and 3 Others

Abdul Mannan Vs Asif Ali

Venna Suri Babu Vs Takasi Venkata Ramesh Babu