Allowed

Sankara Srinivas v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Jul 2022CRLP/4665/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh allowed miscellaneous petitions seeking permission to record a compromise and compound offences under Section 482 CrPC. Finding the compromise voluntary, the court granted permission, ordered annexation of the joint memo, and quashed the criminal proceedings in S.C.No.10 of 2022.

What did the court decide?

Permission to record compromise and compound offences granted; criminal proceedings (S.C.No.10 of 2022) quashed; joint compromise memo to be annexed to the order.

Sankara Srinivas Vs The State of Andhra… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATHI HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶2

I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.4665 OF

¶3

2022

¶4

Sankara Srinivas and another … Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by Represented by its Public Prosecutor and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Mr. Thandava Yogesh Counsel for the 1^st respondent : The Assistant Public Prosecutor Counsel for the 2^nd respondent : --

¶7

ORDER :

¶8

I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022

¶9

These miscellaneous petitions are filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking permission to record compromise and compound the offences to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.10 of 2022 on the file of the Court of VI Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

¶10

The 2^nd respondent / de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 before the Muvvalavanipalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam City for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 498-A, 342, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘lPC’) and the said case is now pending before the trial Court.

¶11

The petitioner/Accused Nos.1 and 2 and the 2^nd respondent/ de facto complainant are present and they are identified by the Station House Officer, Muvvalavanipalem Police Station, Krishna District, and their respective counsels.

¶12

¶13

A joint memo of compromise is filed by both the parties, when terms of joint memo of compromise are explained in Telugu language, they are admitted to be true and correct. It is submitted that petitioner/Accused Nos.1 and 2 and the 2^nd respondent/ de facto complainant voluntarily entered into compromise, settled the matter outside the Court due to intervention of elders and well-wishers and that there are no disputes between both the parties.

¶14

Therefore, I find that the compromise is voluntary in the interest of both parties and permission is granted to compound the offence. Hence, compromise is recorded in terms of the joint memo filed along with the petition. Accordingly, the petitions are ordered. Crl.P.No.4665 of 2022

¶15

In view of the orders passed by this Court in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of

¶16

2022, this Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶17

Registry is directed to annex a copy of joint compromise memo to this order.

¶18

Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶19

_____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

¶20

July 8^th , 2022. BLV

¶21

¶22

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶23

I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.4665 OF

¶24

2022

¶25

Dt: 08.07.2022

¶26

BLV

Sankara Srinivas v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankara Srinivas v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Bollini Subramanyam Naidu, Vs The State of A.P.

Dr.K.Purnachander Rao Vs Prof.Mohd.Hussain

Malla Krishnaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Deevi Anil Krishna Kumarat Anil Battar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sankara Madhuri, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Diamond Commercial Corporation Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh