Allowed

V. Aditya v. State of Telangana, And Another

Telangana HC22 Jul 2021CRLP/3191/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court allowed compoundable criminal proceedings under Sections 403 and 420 IPC to be compounded and quashed. A joint memo of compromise was filed, supported by a Legal Services Committee report confirming the parties' agreement.

What did the court decide?

I.A.Nos. 2 and 3 allowed; Criminal Petition allowed; Proceedings in C.C. No. 81 of 2016 quashed against the petitioner/accused No. 2.

V. Aditya Vs State of Telangana, And Another — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR.THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDA-Y, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND fWer.rri Or.rE'^"'-'

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

I.A.Nos.2A ND3 oi 2021 IN/AND

¶6

c IMINAL P ETITIO NNO:3191 OF2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

h#i,[ir[U:l'liJ:;A:1:"avana^{Rao' Ased about 85 vears, Rto 3-6-226t1,}

¶9

...Petitioner/Defacto-Complainant

¶10

AND

¶11

1 9!?!9 9l Tel?ngana, represented by its pubtic prosecutor, High Court of I elangana, Hyderabad.

¶12

..,RespondenUComplainant

¶13

2 y?IlltiAgltya, S/p V.. Harishchandra prasad, Aged about 37 years, R/o. $aravana Nagar, Besides JMJ Colleage, Tenali.^-

¶14

... RespondenUAccused-2

¶15

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶16

Petition under Section 320 (6) Read with 482 of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the parties to compound the offences charged in CC No.81 of 2016 on the file of the lll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶17

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶18

Petition under Section 320 (2) Read with 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit and Joint Memo of Compromise filed therewith, "the High Court may be pleased to compound the offences charged in CC No.81 of 2016 on the file of the lll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶19

CRIMINAL^{PETITION NO:3'191OF 2021}

¶20

Between:

¶21

o. V. Harishchandra^{Prasad, Aged about !!ygars.,. Occ' Private} V. AditYa,^S/ Employee,^Fl ;iNi;. do;,^{.S;ruo?a npartm?ni,"str""irlo25' i'lew Delhi' Dwarka-} 1 10055.

¶22

...Petil:ioner/Accused^No'2

¶23

AND

¶24

State of Telangana,^{represented by its Public Prosecutor' H gh Court of} Telangana, HYderabad.

¶25

...ResPondent^No'1

¶26

L. Rama Murthy,^{S/o AudinarayalaE4o:Aged about 78 yerlrs'} -Og9^Bejiied -' o.ortJ oirectoi. Rlo. rtait'to. ioz, Galatarihmi Classic, Nc 8-3-302/2/H' Maruthinagar,^{YouSufguda, Hyderabad-500045'}

¶27

...Respondent No.2/l)efacto^Complainant

¶28

Petition under section^{482 of Cr.P.C praying thatin the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of^{Groundsof criminal Petition, the High c:ourt may be pleased} to quash the cc. No. 81 of^{2016 on the file of lll AdditionillchiefMetropolitan} Magistrate, and^pass such other order or orders^{as this Hon'ble Court deems fit.}

¶29

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^{perusing 1.he} Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M.V. Pratap Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioner in Criminal Petition and Respondent No.2 in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 21021 and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in Criminal Petition and l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2021 and of M/s L.N. Bhadriraju, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in Criminal Petition and Petitioner in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 ot 2021 .

¶30

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶31

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI.'USTICEK. LAKSHMAN}

¶32

I.A.Nos.2 & 3 of^2O2L

¶33

IN/AND CRIMINAL^{PETITION NO.3191 0F 2021}

¶34

coMMON ORDER:

¶35

This Criminal^{Petitionis Iiled by the petitioner/accused} No.2 to quash the^{proceedingsin C'C'No'81 of 2016' on the} file of III Additional^{Chief Metropolitan Magistrate'Hyderabad'} registered for^{the offencespunishableunderSections 403 and} 42O read with^{34 of IPC'}

¶36

During the^{pendency of the present Criminal} Petition, the^{parties have compromisedthe matter and'} accordingly,^{respondentNo.2 liled I'A'Nos'2 and 3 of 2O2l to} permit them to compound^{the pffence and compromisethe} matter and accordingly^{quash the proceedingsagainst the} petitioner in C.C.No.81^{of 2016'}

¶37

Vide order^{dated 09'07'2021,this Court'after} recording the^{Submissions made by the learned counsel for} the petitioner^{as well as respondent No'2, directed the parties} to appear^{before the Secretar5r, Telangana High CourtLegal} Services Committee,^{Hyderabad,for their identificationand} directed the^{Secretaryto submit a report by 22'07'2021'In} compliance^{of the said order, the Secretary' Telangana High} Court Legal^{ServicesCommittee has submittedhis report} dated-l1O7.202^1.

¶38

In the report dated 19.07.2021^{of the Telangana} High Court Legal Services^{Committee, Hyderaba'1, it is stated} that on ora1 examination, respondent^{No.2/corrLplainanthas} stated that he has Iiled a complaint^againstthe petitioner/accused No.2 before the Police Sta:ion, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad and the same has been regist(ired^{as Crime} No.1078 of 2Ol4 for the offences under Sections 403 and^42O read with 34 of IPC, later it was numbered as C.C.No.81 of 2016, on the file of III Additiona-l Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and that now he has approached this Court for recording the compromise with the petitioner/ accused No.2.

¶39

The parties herein have filed^joint memo of compromise dated 22.06.2027. The said^jcint memo of compromise and the report of the Secretary, T:langana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, are placed on record.

¶40

In view of the said report and aiso in view of the compromise entered between the petitioner and respondent No.2, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2O2l are a-llowed. Consequently, the Criminai Petition is allowed and the proceedin5,s in C.C.No.81 of 2016, on the lile of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, are hereby quashei against the petitioner/ accused No.2.

¶41

¶42

¶43

Miscellaneous^{Petitions, pending ifany' shall stand}

¶44

ciosed.

¶45

¶46

SD/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE coPY// IL-

¶47

SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To, 1. The lll Additional.Chief^{MetropolitanMagistrate,at Hyderabad'} z. r*o cc. to the^{Public Prosecutor,High court for the state of Telangana, at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶49

Ohe CC to Sri^{M.V. Pratap Kumar' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶50

One CC to Sri^{L.N. Bhadriraju, Advocate[OPUC]}

¶51

Two CD CoPies

¶52

(Along with a copy of^{the Joint Memo)} MMK

A-'P(

HIGH COURT

KLJ

DATED:2210712021

GOMMON ORDER

l.A.Nos. 2 and 3 ot 2021 ln/And GRLP.No.3191 ot2021

¶59

*a srAr€
cJ o
12 AUG20[1
!)
-k c
Dt

¶60

ALLowING THE l.A.Nos. 2 AND 3 OF 2021 AND ALLOWING TllE CRIMINAL PETITION

//-
.,/
,#*dtd
w

tt,
to ot tlro Socrrnd
q\00utoN, IVo. EooI No. 3.6,
!I I{ contcxt
.
l
I (
$
tltf)
.
,t
V.Au,-iu o
.t

¶66

¶67

¶68

it*::::?:il1i1.,1h3:"pi:lhave,,agrced ro onrcr into rhis Agrecment for rrre

¶69

¶70

n'm'MffiuffiM

¶71

I In consideration of terms and cond agrecs to pay a total amount of Rs, 9 Second^.Farty towards full and final s said amount is inclusive of the cntire,i','rui$l}j';;i"ffi pnncrpat 8nd inlerest that i. u"i^g .r.i.Jaly :TyxlTiii''. Second Party.

¶72

*-1i.

¶73

( vuutf) 0"' d 2 <V Ad;+

¶74

Scanled by Camscanner

¶75

,e Tlrc scttlc l.akhs^{on l)'t:,}:all} fivc NinctY mcnl arrount oi Rs. 95,00,000/- (l{upccs iotl^m'tnncr in^{thc fofo} llor" paid by rb e Firsr Puny in favou r oI thc Sc:o nd Parl )' (i)

¶76

(i) An anr in^{thc fofo} s..^I all^{bc Pi']d} ()

¶77

khs^onlY)sh Sccon

¶78

Pur,yt'^ount o tjrc^{of Rs} I3,00,000/- (rlu Pccs I hrrtccll Ld unt^{of thc} I{Paydcrabadtv s.n. Alc. , srrnullanSecoNo: nd Il) 446 arty I 55000090 throug I.r on I 36. linc Karur transfcr Vys)'ato on thc Dank,^{of accoth Sjs} /\grcrrnc11.^Nagarnt Brutch' eous with the signing and sxccutt

¶79

(ii) An amo sha^{l1 bc Paid} unt of Rs. 3Z,00,000/- (Ru pecs ThirtY Two Lakhs^only) of the Sccond

¶80

tttouPAIry g,hb aD.D/N o: ?13_rg oated B.:-aaken^{lnlhe nafie} the^{saleculody of thc}

¶81

Y the FirstP arty and thc same shall be kePt^tn DD^{shallbe handed over}

¶82

counseto the I for the Second Pary sd. L. N. Bhadriraju. The counsel for the S econd P arty on the date of this A gteefienl'

¶83

adiuswl

¶84

shall^be

¶85

(iii) The finaltowards amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fif,y Lakhs^onlY) ile/ed by^the the sale price towards lbe Apartment, which^{shal I bcreg} of^th cFirn Paf,)

¶86

Fint paru of the Fi the^{Second PartY} rst Part (as GpA Holder of

¶87

ln favour ofthe Second Party,

,. v-Ad,ho

4..'

Partics in respect of the Claims.

¶97

7 3;i**..:;:,lTi.if$;!s!ffi^',ff 11":sll,::",':ilT[Ii tSr::llr:illgWi,.,i-ffi^{""["T^Hrlillt$s*:1",*l[:} ;:dffi ;"*i^oi-'r'it frfi-ti'ent^{and ln $lation to the} lubjr.,^{r",,.t of tbis 46Penent'} I r'

¶98

lteted into^{out of free will and}

¶99

f;Hi*i'#1,.a^{,;'ofl'*ffiffitJ:"Yif i'il;;";'*ortecrbveitheror} the PartY.

(
ou):

L-L \I ()

IN \,',1'i'NES n NI)s wl t r, i AB T}IE PAI{TIES I{ERETO t'lA WILL, CoNSENT ANDw IIOVE oNDIl'loNS oN Tl.rrs DA

¶106

tllonth IN WI TNESS ts^{on thcda)"} attd 1,s ar first. F thc putries Irelelo I)avc cxco\ltcd^thoscprcsen ttcn.

¶107

va ttikuri Satyo filnrishchandrn prnsfl d

¶108

..rl.tr.trtrtr.v V ,4d.tto\ v

¶109

tl'...

¶110

tn csscs: 1) L YV.^{f?c^ r..^ ttc^}

¶111

(son of Mr.^{L' Ronranrurthy)}

¶112

Kishore^Gu

,.:

tt\ iI

lL-

ANNEX(rIII:", . ?.<br>DEIAILS oF pENr)rNc r,,.octllLl) l)" '
. No. afj d Sc colld
8 I Co urt/8 o ru m ?x rl i
Hills) (Banj aIa CMMd addt l'irstPnxt' rrl)(: o i\3 Ir'l Pl., nolrl P ai' octl scd
IIndH bod n ddl. F irsII' ltl) o Patr es co d.i?l a jnant'
CMM, nnd )u co rrd a<D t"r.., s" d
1 xtn---Jl?t.Chief HQD Nera agar badJudgc,PS PatiYI aSccondSIrs I n,lFrrtYof ct)P Firsart ;ffidP yas t ?.Pa r, tS Pl^ dast? aSintl an Coount D fl fiefen^na' o d d^tl fRsOAt: nt.
CCC, 49Dcc:c U|,) r,d )aa/for - \V)an rhi n arnrcre nto til c
6 -$rderabad.CViRDA, a CoinP Drclcc o at int AN ln a lakurel,attodr..t rtl.
OS 194/2 0t7 Addl. Chief Sccon ) D"- I aS PI a)as nt Defctl i{f and Mnr' First
Judge, City Party )f Fi rst Part
Civil Coun, Pe n d ing.
derabad
7 cc 38/2018 ComP iainant
Shte Consumcr Syed i badath Ali
Forura and F rs t PartY of First Part as oP
as oP3.
Hyderabad. 2andS econd P
6)t ' -tC
I
Cvhd,]a"

4 i \ t.

Iru Tnr HrcH CoURT FoR THE SrArE oF TETANGANA

¶121

I.A. No. of 2020

¶122

(on the file of the I"lon'ble IIIAddl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hydl B e twee n:

¶123

Shri L. Ranramurthy, S/o Sri L. Audinarayana Rao,

¶124

aged about 85 years, R/o. Door No.3-6-226/1.,

¶125

H imayat Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶126

PETIl'IONER/DEFACTO-COMPLAI NANT

¶127

AND

¶128

1.^'fhe State Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court.

¶129

RESPONDENT/CCOMPLAINANT

¶130

2,^{V+rrttt<u1t'ADLrY+.,} S/^{VattikutiSaryaHarishchandra Pr."sad,} F&#^{rdati**iH&aRee,} 4.. iz-lt -.",,,' aged about5d years, R/o. Saravana Nagar, besides JMJ Colleage, Tenali.

¶131

RESPONDENT/ACCUSED -,-

¶132

IorNT^lv-'[ ]:M o

¶133

The complainant and the accused are hereby affixing their signalures in this f oint Memo on their own frer:: will and volition and that they undertake to abide by all the conditions mutually agreed upon by both the parties in the Memorandum of Understanding; which has been annexed to the present criminal petition.

Atr

q i'

For alr the reasons stated in the accompanying ;{ffidavit and arso the joint memo entered into between the parties, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be,pleased to permit the petitioners as well as the Respondent to compound the offences and to quash alr further proceedings in C.C. No. BI of 20j.6 [on the file of the Hon 'ble III Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hydl, in the inrerest ofjustice

L. Ra v

!rrpc

(ComplainanrJ

ditya

IPetitioner/Accused No. 2]

¶143

Counsel for the Compiainant ,2'-k^e/5 Crr^l b+^r4:/A/ -z /nrd-aesponuht

¶144

Counsel for the Accused

¶145

H^yo ERasa o

¶146

z"iI+, luNLt.,zo27.

V. Aditya v. State of Telangana, And Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Aditya v. State of Telangana, 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

Pathepuram Naveen Vs The State of Telangana

Redcarpet Tech Private Limited Vs The State of Telangana

Dmi Finance Private Limited Vs the State of Telangana

Smt. Kantimahanti Padma Vs The State of Telangana Rep by its P.P

Memon MD Amin Abdulrajjak Vs The State of Telangana

Rajaganesh Chandrasekaran Vs The State of Telangana