Seelam Prudhvi Raj Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public^Prosecutor, High^court at Amaravati Through Station House Officer, Inspector^{ofPolice,Nunna} Police Station, Vijayawada city, Krishna District

¶17

Sanku Durga, W/o. Pothu Raju, 32 years, Kapu, SF-7, C2-34, Vambay __Colony, Vijayawada. (Mother of the Victim Girl/LW-1)

¶18

...Respondent/Complainant

¶19

w. Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C (U/s 528 of B.N.S.S) praying th^t in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 5 in SC.No.121/2021 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for Speedy Trail of Offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada for alleged^offenceunder Section 509, 506 R/w. 34 of IPC and Sec. 12 of POCSO Act 2012.

¶20

I-A. NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C R/w 320(2) of Cr.P.C (U/s 528 of B.N.S.S) praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise and quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Accu^sed No.1 to 5 in the above CrI. Petition No. 749/2025 against^S.C.No.121of 2021 on the Court of Special Judge for Speedy Trail^{ofOffencesunder} Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada

¶22

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2025

¶23

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C R/w 320(6) of Cr.P.C (U/s 528 of B.N.S.S) praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner/Accused No.1 to 5 to file the compromise petition in the above CrI.P.No. 749/2025 In S.C.No. 121/2021 on the Court of Special Judge for Speedy Trail of Offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada.

¶24

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing^{theMemorandum} of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Pedapudi Priyavrath, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Mohammed Shafi, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2

¶25

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶26

r

¶27

APHC010035732025

¶28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶29

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

[3368]

¶31

MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶32

PRESENT

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶34

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 749/2025

¶35

Between:

¶36

Seelam Prudhvi Raj and Others

¶37

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

¶38

AND

¶39

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) and Others

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

¶41

1.PEDAPUDI PRIYAVRATH

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

¶43

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶44

Mohammed Shafi

¶45

The Court made the following:

¶46

2

¶47

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

¶48

lA Nos.1 and 2 OF 2025 in/and Criminal Petition No:749 OF 2025

¶49

COMMON ORDER:

¶50

This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,^hasbeenfiled on behalf of the petitioners herein/A1 to A5, to quash the proceedings in SC No. 121 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada, registered for the offences punishable under Section 509, 506 read with 34 IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act 2012.

¶51

Today, when the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the petitioners herein/AI to A5, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/de facto complainant, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State are present before this Court. The complainant^andaccused produced their respective Aadhar cards in proof of their identity. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 identified their parties in the open Court. The concerned police officer is present before this Court and identified the parties.

¶52

3

¶53

This Court questioned the respondent No.2/cye facto complainant with regard to compromise, and she categorically stated^totheextent that she has voluntarily entered into compromise with the petitioners herein/Accused and there is no threat, coercion or^{undueinfluence} in arriving at the compromise. This Court is satisfied^{withtheidentification} of the parties and voluntariness in arriving at the compromise. In view of the compromise between the parties, the chances^{ofconvictionare} remote and bleak.

¶54

The alleged offence under Section 12 of the POCSO Act,²⁰¹² is a bailable offence which is punishable with an imprisonment upto three (03) years only. The petitioners herein/Accused are all students. Considering the gravity of the offence and peculiar^{circumstancesof} the present case and in the light of judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another^, on quashing of criminal case, when the parties entered into settlement and compromise, the Criminal Petition is allowed and therefore, the proceedings in SC No.121 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences under Protection^{ofChildrenfrom} Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada, is hereby quashed.

2012 (9) Scale 257

4

^ •

Accordingly, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 and Criminal Petition

¶59

No.749 of 2025 are allowed.

¶60

As a sequel thereto, the interlocutory applications, if any

¶61

pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

Sd/- U SRIDEVI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Special Judge for Speedy Trail of Offences under^Protectionof Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada, Krishna^District

¶68

The Station House Officer, Inspector of Police, Nunna Police Station, Vijayawada city, Krishna District

¶69

One CC to Sri Pedapudi Priyavrath Advocate [OPUC]

¶70

One CC to Sri Mohammad Shafi Advocate [OPUC]

¶71

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of^{AndhraPradeshat} Amaravathi [OUT]

6. Three CD Copies

Stu

vna

*along with the joint memo filed in I. A No.l of 2025

HIGH COURT

DATED:10/02/2025

ORDER

I.A Nos. 1 & 2 of 2025 in/and CRLP.No.749 of 2025

¶80

ANO/^
I 1 MAR 2025
a
^ . Current Section ^
%^5gespATCV^^

¶81

ALLOWING THE I.A NOS.1 AND 2 OF 2025 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶82

0

¶83

Sanku Durga, W/o. Pothu Raju, / 32 years, Kapu, SF-7, C2-34, / Vambay Colony, Vijayawada. (Mother of the Victim Girl/LW-1)

¶84

...Respondent No.2/ Defacto Complainant

¶85

JOINT MEMO

¶86

It is most respectfully submitted that the Petitioners/Accused No.l to 5 and the respondent No.2 herein file the present joint^Memoasthe dispute between them was amicably settled in view of^{thecompromiseand} nt to„ compound the offences between the defacto complainant/Responde No.2 and the Petitioners/Accused No.l to 5 as the matter^{wassettledout} of court amicably in front of the family members, elders of both side with free will.

¶87

It is therefore pray that this Hon'ble Court may be^{pleasedtopermit} the Petitioners/Accused No.l to 5 to compromise the^{casewiththeDefacto} complainant/Respondent No.2 in the above Crl.Petition^No.749/2025 against S.C.No. 121 of 2021 on the Court of Special^{JudgeforSpeedyTrail} of Offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada and to pass such other order or orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶88

v' r (R cjg’ /
2. S Cr^ \J
3. ^
4.
)
5. /■
Petitioners/Accused No.l to 5
[
Counsel for the Petitioners
Amaravati
Dated;.5^11-2025

¶89

!3i^^1^i^inant
/

¶90

Counsel forllieii No.2
'rtf
ji

Seelam Prudhvi Raj v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seelam Prudhvi Raj v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurrala Sreenivasulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Matham Vijaya Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Live Stock Transports Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

G Chandini Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Meesala Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Mulpuri Venkata Ramana Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh