Allowed

Syed Khaja Pasha, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Jun 2017CRLRC/1796/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This brief common order recorded an amicably arrived compromise between the petitioner and the second respondent. Consequently, the court allowed the criminal revision petition and set aside the appellate judgment and the trial court’s order, making the joint memo part of the record.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Revision Case No.2868 of 2017 allowed; Impugned appellate judgment and trial court order set aside; Joint memo made part of record; other pending petitions closed.

Syed Khaja Pasha, Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI

¶2

Crl.R.C.MP.No.2868 of 2017 in/and Crl.R.C.No.1796 of 2017

¶3

COMMON ORDER:

¶4

The Criminal Revision Case, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (‘the CrPC’, for short) is filed by the unsuccessful appellant assailing the judgment, dated 07.08.2013, passed in Crl.A.No.943 of 2012. By the said judgment, the learned V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Hyderabad, while dismissing the said appeal had confirmed the order, dated 08.08.2011, in DVC.No.137 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

¶5

Along with the criminal revision case, the 2^nd respondent filed Crl.RC.MP.No.2868 of 2017 requesting to record the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent and allow the criminal revision case and set aside the judgment of the appellate Court as well as the order of the trial Court.

¶6

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent are present. They produced copies of their respective identity proofs. They are also identified by their respective counsel.

¶7

When asked by the Court, the 2^nd respondent stated that she voluntarily settled the matter amicably without any force from any quarter and confirmed the terms of compromise, which are said to have been arrived at, at the intervention of elders and well wishers. The petitioner also stated that they have amicably settled the matter and further asserted the terms of the compromise, which are reduced into writing in the form of joint memo filed along with the afore-stated Miscellaneous Petition.

¶8

¶9

In the circumstances, the compromise is recorded and Crl.RC.MP.No.2868 of 2017 is allowed. Consequently, Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the judgment, dated 07.08.2013, passed in Crl.A.No.943 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the learned V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Hyderabad, and the order, dated 08.08.2011, in DVC.No.137 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, are set aside. The Joint Memo filed by the parties shall form part of this order.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

____________________________
JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI
20.06.2017
Vjl

Syed Khaja Pasha, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Khaja Pasha, v. The State of Telangana

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

V.Veera Swamy, Vs T.Subramanyam

S.Jagadeesh Babu Vs Koilada Abishek

Dr. Nasreen Babu Khan Vs M/s Srikara Electronics Limited

Rathod Bancilal Vs State of Telangana.

Vibha Vijay Tumala Vs Morla Edukondalu Goud

Dadi Appala Raju Vs State of Andhra Pradesh