Allowed

Anand Siddineni Venkatarayulu Nayudu and 3 Others v. the State of A.P. and Another

Telangana HC30 Mar 2016CRLP/4453/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act following a recorded compromise between the parties. The court, citing Section 482 CrPC, allowed the petition and acquitted the accused.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.7 of 2014; Acquittal of petitioners; Petition allowed with costs.

Anand Siddineni Venkatarayulu Nayudu and 3 Others Vs the… — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4453 of 2016

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No.7 of 2014 on the file of the Woman Police Station, Rajahmundry, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶5

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶6

When the case is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the de facto complainant submit that they have filed Crl.P.M.P.No.5043 of 2016 seeking permission of this Court to compound the offences and consequently, to quash the proceedings. Along with the said application, they have filed the Joint Memo signed by the complainant as well as the petitioners and also the same is signed by the counsel for both the parties. Both the parties are present before the Court and asserted that they have entered into compromise.

¶7

Considering the above, the petitioner and the de facto complainant are permitted to compound the offences. In view of the amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties, Crl.P.M.P.No.5043 of 2016 is ordered and the compromise is recorded. Consequent thereto, the criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in F.I.R.No.7 of 2014 on the file of the Woman Police Station, Rajahmundry, are hereby quashed and the petitioners are acquitted of the offences alleged against them.

¶8

The petitioners are directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as costs to the Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority. The Registry is directed to issue order copy only on production of the receipt of payment issued by the Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority.

¶9

The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed with costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

¶10

_____________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶11

30.03.2016 pln

Anand Siddineni Venkatarayulu Nayudu and 3 Others v. the State of A.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Siddineni Venkatarayulu Nayudu and 3 Others v. the State of A.P. and Another

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

Made Lakshmanarao Vs State of A.P. and Another

Kantharam Patil, Vs The State of Ap.

Thandu Rama Krishna Vs Thandu Padma

G.Mohan Rao and 2 Others Vs the State of Telangana and Another

Dr. K.Anusha Vs State of Telangana

B.Manikya Rao, Vs State of Telangana