Allowed

Bokka Venkata Satya Prasad v. State of Ap., Rep.byits Public Prosecutor

Telangana HC17 Oct 2011CRLRC/2074/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court exercised inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to acquit the petitioners after confirming that they had compromised the prosecution matter outside court and the complainant filed an affidavit stating no objection to acquittal, directing payment of costs to the Legal Services Authority.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners are acquitted of the charges, and the conviction and sentence are set aside.

Bokka Venkata Satya Prasad Vs State of Ap., Rep.byits… — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶2

Crl.R.C.M.P.No.3131 of 2011 and CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2074 of 2011

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2, under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., seeking to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed against them in C.C.No.1248 of 2010 by the II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajahmundry, vide judgment dated 17.03.2010, as confirmed by the Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, in Crl.A.No.76 of 2010, vide judgment dated 29.08.2011.

¶5

Initially, the petitioners were prosecuted in C.C.No.1248 of 2005 by the II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajahmundry, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 506 of IPC. After due trial and on appreciation of both oral and documentary evidence, the learned Magistrate convicted the petitioners, under Section 255(2) Cr.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month each for the offence under Section 420 of IPC and also sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each for the offence under Section 406 of IPC, while acquitting them of the offence under Section 506 of IPC, by judgment dated 17.03.2010.

¶6

As against the said conviction and sentence, the petitioners preferred Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2010, whereby the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act, East Godavari at

¶7

Rajahmundry, on consideration of the material available on record, vide judgment dated 29.08.2011, allowed the appeal in part by setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court for the offence under Section 406 of IPC, while confirming the conviction and sentence recorded for the offence under Section 420 of IPC. Aggrieved thereby, present revision is filed by the petitioners.

¶8

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, both the petitioners and the complainant are present and filed Crl.R.C.M.P.No.3131 with a prayer to permit them to compromise the matter and to compound the offence. An affidavit duly signed by the complainant is also filed before this Court. When questioned, the complainant reiterated the contents of the affidavit and stated that the disputes between himself and the petitioners are settled outside the Court and he had no objection to acquit the petitioners.

¶9

In view of the fact that the parties have compromised the matter outside the Court and in view of the guidelines laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court, by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners can be acquitted. Further, the parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five thousand only), towards costs, before the A.P. Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad, and accordingly they have paid the same before the said Authority vide receipt No.413 dated 17.10.2011.

¶10

Accordingly, Crl.R.C.M.P.No.3131 of 2011 and the Criminal Revision Case are allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court are hereby set aside and, consequently, the petitioners are acquitted of the charges

¶11

levelled against them. The affidavit of the complainant filed into Court be made as part of this order. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed shall stand closed. __________________ RAJA ELANGO, J. 17^th October, 2011 cbs

¶12

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶13

Crl.R.C.M.P.No.3131 of 2011 and CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2074 of 2011 (Allowed)

¶14

17^th October, 2011

¶15

cbs

Bokka Venkata Satya Prasad v. State of Ap., Rep.byits Public Prosecutor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bokka Venkata Satya Prasad v. State of Ap., Rep.byits Public Prosecutor

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

Anand Pittampally, Vs Menaka Kumari

M.a.Gaffar Vs The State, Through SHO Ps., Kortula, Karimnagar District

Rudrakshi Venkanna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kurapati Venkata Kotaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rudrakshi Venkataiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Seela Ramesh, (A10) Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh