Partly allowed

Sankara Madhuri, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Jul 2022CRLP/4679/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Miscellaneous petitions seeking quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. were disposed of. The High Court recorded a joint compromise memo filed by the accused and the de facto complainant, found the compromise voluntary, and granted permission to compound the offences.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's I.A.Nos.1 and 2 allowed; Criminal Petition No.4679 of 2022 allowed; proceedings quashed.

Sankara Madhuri, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Quashing and FIR | 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.4679 OF

¶3

2022

¶4

Sankara Madhuri … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by Represented by its Public Prosecutor and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. M.Sohail Sharieef 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 Crime No.571 of 2022 on the file of A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada.

¶10

The 2^nd respondent / de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner/Accused before the A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada, for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 of IPC and the said case is now pending before the trial Court.

¶11

The petitioner/Accused and the 2^nd respondent/ de facto complainant are present and they are identified by the Station House Officer, A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada, and their respective counsels and produced Photostat copies of Aadhar cards to prove their identity.

¶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 and the 2^nd respondent/ de facto complainant voluntarily entered into compromise, settled the matter outside the Court 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.4679 of 2022

¶15

In view of the orders passed by this Court in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2022, this Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶16

Registry is directed to annex a copy of joint compromise memo

¶17

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.4679 OF

¶24

2022

¶25

Dt: 08.07.2022

¶26

BLV

Sankara Madhuri, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankara Madhuri, 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 Srinivas Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

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