The court allowed multiple compound and quashing applications. Upon establishing that disputes were settled to maintain peace, proceedings against the petitioners were quashed, they were acquitted, and bail bonds were cancelled.
Compounding of offences allowed; petitioners acquitted; bail bonds cancelled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO
CrlP MP Nos. 6112 and 6513 of 2017 in CrlP No.5166 of 2017 CrlP MP Nos.6282,6283, 6284 of 2017 in CrlP No.6151 of 2017, CrlP MP Nos.6391,6392,6393 of 2017 in CrlP No.6247 of 2017 and
in/and Criminal Petition Nos.5166,6151 and 6247 of 2017
COMMON ORDER :
Pending disposal of the quash proceedings in Criminal Petition Nos. 6151 and 6247 respectively outcome of Cr.No.208 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 377 and 109 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, from the split up charge sheets covered by C.C.Nos. 110 of 2017 and 160 of 2017 respectively insofar as A.2, A.3 and A.5 in C.C.No.110 and A.1 and A.4 in C.C.No.160 of 2017 for the total 5 accused of the said crime, the petitioners and the defacto-complainant filed Crl.M.P.No.6282 and 6284 of 2017 in 6151 of 2017 and 6392 and 6393 of 2017 in Crl.P.No.6247 of 2017 seeking permission to compound the offences by recording compromise.
Among the 5 petitioners supra, the A.1 Enagandula Bharadwaj and his sister Saroja(A.4) also present and they sought permission to be represented by their father Pandarinath(A.2)cum-GPA holder by Crl.P. M.P. No.6391 of 2017 and the same is allowed. Among the three petitioners of Crl.P.No.6151 supra the petitioners 1 and 2 Pandarinath and his wife Saroja are present. So far as Crl.P.No.5166 of 2017 concerned, it is outcome of Cr.No.85 of 2017 of Ramachandrapuram Police Station, Cyberabad registered in all against 10 accused on the report of A.2 Enagandula
2
Pandarinath supra for the offences punishable under Sections 448,406,380,506 and 149 IPC and the petition is seeking to quash the proceedings and pending disposal of the same, the petitioners, (the A.5 since old lady and away in USA, permitted by Crl.P.M.P.No.6283 of 2017 to be represented by A.5), and the defacto-complainant(A.2 Pandarinath) filed the application seeking to compound the offences vide Crl.P.M.P.Nos.6512 and 6513 of 2017 and the same are allowed.
Heard the respective defacto-complainants and the accused persons present supra and they stated that these are practically a case and counter respectively and to purchase peace, through elders they settled all disputes including the matrimonial dispute between the son of said Pandarinath and wife of Bharadwaj by name Priyanka-1st petitioner in Crl.P.No.5166 of 2017.
Having regard to the above, all the CrlP MP Nos. 6152 and 6513 of 2017 in CrlP No.5166 of 2017, CrlP MP Nos.6282,6283, 6284 of 2017 in CrlP No.6151 of 2017 and CrlP MP Nos.6391,6392,6393 of 2017 in CrlP No.6247 of 2017 are allowed and consequently, the Crl.P.Nos.5166, 6151,6247 and 5166 of 2017 are allowed. All the accused persons/ petitioners herein in all the criminal petitions are acquitted and their bail bonds shall stand cancelled. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_________________________ Dr. B.SIVA SANKARA RAO J,
Date:03.08.2017 vvr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the pending criminal proceedings can be compounded upon settlement between the parties.
Pandarinath
Enagandula Bharadwaj
Priyanka
Enagandula
State of Telangana
Dr. B Siva Sankara Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
