Allowed

K.Venkatesh, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC24 Sept 2010CRLP/9514/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings for causing hurt via Section 324 IPC. The Court held that a settlement was reached and the complainant had no interest in prosecution, quashing the proceedings under inherent powers of Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings in C.C.No.957 of 2010 against the petitioner were quashed invoking the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

K.Venkatesh, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.9514 of 2010

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the further proceedings in CC.No.957 of 2010 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel on either side. Perused the records.

¶6

On the basis of a report given by the 2^nd respondent herein, a case in Crime No.8 of 2010 of P.S. Osmania University, Hyderabad, was registered against the petitioner herein, for the offence punishable under Section 324 of I.P.C. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, and the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.957 of 2010.

¶7

It appears, there was amicable settlement between the parties, on account of the advise of the elders.

¶8

Today, the petitioner/accused and respondent No.2, who is the defacto-complainant, are present before this Court. When questioned, respondent No.2 stated that she has compromised with the petitioner/accused and that she is not interested in prosecuting the petitioner/accused.

¶9

Having regard to the fact that both parties have settled the dispute out of Court and that the defacto-complainant is not interested in prosecuting the petitioner/accused, it is considered that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings against the

¶10

petitioner/Accused in C.C.No.957 of 2010 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. It is, therefore, considered as a fit case to quash further proceedings against the petitioner/Accused in C.C.No.957 of 2010 on the file of the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, by invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and, accordingly, the same is quashed.

¶11

In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶12

________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J

¶13

24.09.2010. v v

K.Venkatesh, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Venkatesh, 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

Abdul Rawoof, Vs Syed Noor Ahmed , Noora

Helical Tubes and Ducts Pvt. Ltd., Admn.Office 1-8-303/34, Vs Sri Mukund Kakani

Vemuri Chowdeswari, Vs Kalidindi Subhadra Devi

N.Pawan Kumar, Vs Smt. Vijaya Deepti Rolla , Deepti Rolla

Neeraj Singh,A-3 Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Parimiseety Kalyana Surendra Babu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh