Disposed

T.Venkateswara Rao v. M/s.Agarwal Traders

Telangana HC3 Sept 2014CRLRC/1731/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court ordered the compounding of the offence following a successful agreement between the accused and complainant, imposing a cost deposit. Consequently, the convicting order was set aside, warrants were cancelled, and the revision was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Compounding of the offence, setting aside conviction, cancellation of warrants, closure of miscellaneous petitions.

T.Venkateswara Rao Vs M/s.Agarwal Traders — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO CRL.R.C.No.1731 of 2013

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

This revision filed by the petitioner-accused aggrieved by the Judgment dated 07.08.2013 in Criminal Appeal No.322 of 2010 on the file of IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 03.09.2010 in C.C. No.342 of 2008 on the file of XIV Additional Judge-cum-XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. Apart from the revision, both the complainant and the accused filed an application to record the memorandum of compromise and compound the offence in C.C. No.342 of 2008.

¶4

2) The accused and the complainant present represented that they compromised the matter and filed petition for compounding. As per the expression of the Apex Court (3 Judges bench) in Damodar S.Prabhu V. Sayed Babula l^[1] guidelines are laid down in saying the compounding can be permitted at any stage, subject to application of the accused and subject to condition of deposit of costs either to legal services authority or other as the Court directs out of the cheque value specified i.e, upto 10% before the trial Court if not moved at the initial stage and upto 15% before the Court of Session or High Court and thereafter before the Apex Court upto 20% and at para 17 of the Judgment it was held as part of the guidelines that the concerned Court can ofcourse reduce the costs with regard to the special facts and circumstances while recording reasons in writing for such variance of said guidelines. Having regard to the above by applying the propositions to the present facts by imposing Rs.2,500/towards costs to the Chief Justice Relief Fund, subject to that permitting for compounding.

¶5

3) Accordingly and since compliance is made the criminal revision case is disposed of by recording compromise, compounding the offence and as a sequel the conviction judgment of trial Court confirmed by the first appellate Court, set aside as compounded. Having regard to the

¶6

above, warrants issued, if any, against the revision petitioner (accused) by the 1^st appellate Court or trial Court are hereby cancelled for the matter ended in compromise and nothing remained to enforce or execute.

¶7

4) Since the main revision is disposed of, all the miscellaneous petitions pending in this appeal, if any, shall stand closed.

¶8

__________________________ Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J

¶9

Date: 03-09-2014 ksh

¶10

[1] (2010)5 SCC 31

T.Venkateswara Rao v. M/s.Agarwal Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Venkateswara Rao v. M/s.Agarwal Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E. Mani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd., Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

V.Raghu, Vs Smt v.Mahima Rani

S. Shankar Naidu Vs State of Ap

S. Srinivasa Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Ratnala Bala Venkateswara Rao , Balaji Vs State of A.P.