Allowed

Salagala Kiran Kumar v. State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Feb 2023CRLP/2003/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an interim application to amend the FIR reference in a Criminal Petition. It subsequently granted permission to compound an offence under Section 498-A IPC based on a joint compromise memo signed by parties. Consequently, the main Criminal Petition was allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners were quashed.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to compound the offence under Section 498-A IPC; Criminal Petition allowed; proceedings quashed.

Salagala Kiran Kumar Vs State of Ap — Dowry and Cruelty | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATHI

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶3

I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2023 IN/AND

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2003 OF 2019

¶5

Between:

¶6

Sri Salagala Kiran Kumar and three others

¶7

… Petitioners/ Accused

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor and another

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

Counsel for the petitioners : Mr.Raja Reddy Koneti

¶12

Counsel for 1^st respondent : The Public Prosecutor

¶13

Counsel for 2^nd respondent : Mr.A.Bhaskera Chary

¶14

ORDER :

¶15

I.A.No.1 of 2023

¶16

This is an application seeking to amend the main prayer in the Criminal Petition by mentioning “ F.I.R. No.8 of 2019 on the file of A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada City ” instead of C.C.No.8 of 2019 on the file of the Court of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada City.

¶17

¶18

Considering the submissions made and perusing the averments made in the petition, I.A. No.1 of 2023 is allowed.

¶19

Registry is directed to make necessary corrections wherever they are required.

¶20

I.A.No.2 of 2023

¶21

This miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 320(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1873 (Cr.PC), seeking permission to compromise the matter for the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) in F.I.R. No.8 of 2019 on the file of A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada City.

¶22

The petitioner/ de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the respondent Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.1 to 4 in the above said Crime, for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC.

¶23

The petitioner and the respondent Nos.1 to 4 are present. They are identified by their respective counsels and produced Photostat copies of Aadhar cards to prove their identity.

¶24

¶25

A joint memo of compromise, which was signed by the parties, is filed. When the terms of joint memo of compromise are explained in Telugu language, the parties have admitted to be true and correct. It is submitted that the de facto complainant and the accused voluntarily entered into compromise, settled the matter outside the Court and that there are no disputes between both the parties.

¶26

This Court has gone through the complaint lodged pursuant to which the crime is registered as also the affidavit filed along with the compromise petition. In such circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to compound the offence, in the interest of both the parties and continuation of criminal proceedings may affect their future. Therefore, permission is granted to compound the offence. Accordingly, compromise is recorded in terms of the joint memo filed along with the petition and the I.A. No.2 of 2023 is allowed.

¶27

Crl.P.No.2003 of 2019

¶28

In view of the orders passed by this Court in I.A.No.2 of 2023, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners in F.I.R. No.8 of 2019 on the file of

¶29

¶30

A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada City, are quashed. Registry is directed to annex a copy of joint compromise memo filed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 to this order.

¶31

Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending

¶32

if any, shall stand closed.

¶33

________________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

¶34

February 03, 2023.

¶35

Note: Dispatch order copy tomorrow, after carrying out necessary amendments as ordered in I.A.No.1 of 2023. (By Order) vasu

Salagala Kiran Kumar v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salagala Kiran Kumar 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

Giddaluru Veera Swamy Vs Pattaneshetti Ravi Subhash,I.a.S

M/S. Raghuram Hume Pipes Private Limited Vs Sashibhushan Kumar,I.a.S

Nagaraju Subbaraju Vs Sri Shamsher Singh Rawat

Graddagunta Madhavaiah Vs N Srinivasulu

Ayitha Rajesh Vs N Srinivasulu

Harikasree Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh