Allowed

Mettupally Santosh Reddy v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC16 Dec 2021CRLP/3850/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner for offences under IPC and SC/ST (PoA) Act, 2015. The court recorded a joint compromise and allowed the petitioners' miscellaneous applications to compound the offences.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings in Crime No.281 of 2021; Licence to compromise offences under Section 320 CrPC.

Mettupally Santosh Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and… — Caste Atrocities | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEIV1BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3850 OF 2021 ALONG WITH I,A.NOS.2 AND 3 OF 2021

¶7

Betwee n:

¶8

Mettupally Santosh Reddy, S/o. Late. M. Venkat Reddy aged about 48 Years, Occ.Business, Fl/o. Plot No. 59. Satya Sagar Colony, Vydehinagar, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad.

¶9

,,.PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, through Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶12

Sri. Ramavath Kishan Naik, S/o. Kanya, aged about 37 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.5-2-3S6/8C/83/A, Sahebnagar, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad

¶13

,..RESPONDENTS/COM PLAINANT

¶14

Petition under Section 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 call for the records relating to proceedings in Cr. No.281 o'f 2021 on the file of Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Rachakonda Police Commissionarate and quash the same against the petitioner herein

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 202'l

¶16

Petition under Section 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 direct the respondent police to not to arrest the petitioner relating to Proceedings in Cr.No. 281 of 2021 on the file of Vanasthalipuram Police Station Rachakonda Police Commissionarate in the interest of^justice and^pass such other order or orders which may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶17

Common C.T. in lAs

¶18

Between:

¶19

Sri. Ramavath Kishan Naik, S/o. Kanya, aged about 37^years, Occ. Business, Rio.H.No.5-2-396/8C/83/A, Sahebnagar, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad

¶20

...pETlTlONER

¶21

AND

¶22

1 The State of Telangana, through Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telansana, ilIJ8|ES[?lrNT

¶23

Mettupally Santosh Reddy, S/o. Late N,4.Venkat Reddy aged about 48 Years, Occ.Business, R/o. Plot No.59. Satya Sagar Colony, Vydehinagar, Vanasthali puram, Hyd erabad.

¶24

.....Respondents/ Accused No.2 to 5

¶25

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶26

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying thatⁱⁿ the circumstances^stated in the N/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the^{High Court may be pleased} to permit the^petitioner/ defacto complainant^{to compond the offences U/s. 504,506} lPC,3(1)(r) (s),3 (2)^(Va) SC ST POA Act against^{the accused No.1 in Cr.No 28l of} 2021 on the file of Vanasthalipuram^{Police StationRachakonda Police} Commissionarate in the interest of^justice

¶27

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶28

Petition under s( ction 320 of the cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memoranc rm of Grounds of the criminal petition, fl-re High court may be pleased to dispose € s compounded the offences U/s. 504, 506 lpC:3(1) (r) (s), 3 (2) (va) sc sr PoA Ar t between the defacto-complainant and the accused No..t in cr.No. 281 of 2021 on t re frle of Vanasthalipuram police station Rachakonda police commissionarate in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders which may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶29

This Petition cor ring on for hearrng, upon perusing the r,4emorandum of Grounds of criminal P )tition and upon hearing the arguments of sri BASKULA ATHIK, Advocate for the Petitioner in cr|.p.3850/2021 and for R2 in both lAs 2 & 3 of 2021 , and of the Additir nal Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Rr:spondent No.1 in crl.P.No.3B50/2021 anc for R1 in both tAs 212021 and 3t2021 ai t4/s. Bandi sai Vamshi, Advocate for the petitioners in lA 2121 and lA 3121 and for R2 in Cr|.P.385012021

¶30

The Court made the follo ving: ORDER

¶31

HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN}

¶32

CRIMINAL^{PETITIONNO.3850 0F 2021} ALONG WITH^{I.A. Nos. 2 AND 3 0F 2021}

¶33

COMMON ORDER:

¶34

ThisCrirninalPetitionisfiledbythepetitioner-accusedNo'1to quash the proceedings^{in Crirne No'281 of 2021 of Vanasthalipurarn} Police Station,^{registered for the offences underSections- 324 and 506} oflPC and Sections^{- 3 (2) (Va) and 3 (l) (r) (s) oftheScheduledCastes} and the Scheduled^{Tribes (Preventionof Atrocities) Act, 2015'}

¶35

During the^{pendencyof the presentCriminal Petition'the} parties have comprorrised^{the matterand,accordingly,respondent No'2-} cle facto complainant^{filed I'A.Nos'2 and 3 of 2021 to permit him to enter} into compt'omise,^{record the terms of compromisethereof and compound} the oflences^{by quashingthe proceedings against the accusedin the said} Crime

¶36

i.Videorderdated23.07.202l,thisCouft'afterrecordingthe subrnissions^{made by the leamed counsel for the petitioneras well as} respondent^{No.2, 'directed the parties to appear belore the Secretary'} Telangana^{High Courl Legal ServicesCommittee' Hyderabad'for their} identification and^{directedthe Secretary to submit a leport by} 30.01 .2021. In^{complianceof the saidorder, the parties have appeared} betbre tl.re Secretary,^{TelanganaHigh Court LegalServicesCommittee'} andtheSecretaryhasidentifiedthepartieswiththeirrespectiveAadhar Cards and accordingly^{submitteda report dated2S'07'2021to that effecl}

¶37

¶38

The l,afties herein have filed joint memo of compromise. The said joint me no of compromise and the repolt 01: the Secretary, Telangana Higr r Court Legal Services Committee, Hyder:abad, are placed on record. In 1 1e repoft of the Secretary, it is mentioned that r.espondent No.2 had filed a complaint against the petitioner - accused No.1 before the Vanasthaliluram Police station, and the same has been registered as Crime No.281 of 2021 for the aforesaid offences. and that now he has entered into c< mpromise with the accused and accordingly approached this Court for recording the compromise with the petitioner - accused No.1.

¶39

In vi :w of the said report and also in view ol'the compromise entered betwet n the petitioner and respondent No.2, I.,.Nos.2 and 3 ol 2021 are allor.r :d. Consequently. the Crirninal Petirion is allou,ed and the proceedings in proceedings in Crime No.28l of 2021 of Vanasthalip uranr Police Station. ale hereby quashed against the peritioner - accused No. l. subject to pay nent of an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupee:s Five Thousand Only) to the^'l :langana High Court Advocates' Association, I-lyderabad, within ten (lt ) days from today, and file proof of the same into the Registry.

¶40

As a se quel, the miscellaneous petitions, if an1,. pending in the

¶41

Criminal Petit on shall stand closed.

¶42

I {

¶43

Sd/-K.VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' L-J.t' SECTIOi] OFFICER

¶44

¶45

The Hon'ble ) XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyb,erabad, at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶46

The Station l- cuse Officer, Vanasthalipuram Police Statior, Rachakonda, Ranga Reddy Distric .

¶47

One CC to Sr Baskula Athik, Advocate^(OPUC)

¶48

One CC to Sr Bandi Sai Vamshi, Advocate^(OPUC)

¶49

Two CCs to t re Public Prosecutor, High Court for^{the State of Telangana,} Hyderabad ((^tUT)

¶50

Two CD Cop -"5

¶51

One Spare C rpy

¶52

¶53

Cd^'

¶54

Note: By order of Hon'ble High Court amount paid by the Counsel towards Telangana Advocates Association a sum of Rs.5,000i- vide Receipt No.52285 dated 1611212021 .

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611212021

COMMON ORDER

CRLP.No.3850 of 202' ALONG WITH IA NOS 2 & 3 OF 2021

¶59

ALLOWING THE CRL.^).

¶60

.,--=--:.<br>1 dE sIA r€
/ e.
'{ rl- <br>/
'a, <br>::i:l
2 0 ,.ralJ zol2

¶61

C,
YO
\t .)

¶62

f:-

¶63

MEMORANDUM^{OF CRIMINAL MISC-PETITION} (UNDER SEC.320(6)^{R/w Sec' 482 OI THE CrP'C) /}

¶64

IN THE^{HON,BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUREAT :: HYDERABAD} FOR THE^{STATE OF TELANGANA}

¶65

BETWEEN:

¶66

of202l I.ANo IbI ' of 2021 Crl.P.No. 3+so

¶67

Sri. Ramavath^{Kishan Naik} S/o. KanYa,^{aged about37 Years,} O..,, Srtir"i.,^{n"lo' H'No'5-2-396 lBClS3lA'} J.i.Ur.g..,vanasthatipuram,^{Hyclerabad' /}

¶68

...Petitioner

¶69

Al.lD

¶70

1 The State^{ofTelangana through VanasthalipuramPolice Station'} Represented^{by its Public Prosecutot''} High court^{forthe State ofTelangana'} at Hyderabad. ...ResPondent

¶71

2 Mettupally^{Santosh ReddY}

¶72

Sio. Lite.^{M. VenkatReddY}

¶73

aeed about^{48 Years,Occ'Business'} R]o. Plot^{No' 59. Satya Sagar Colony'} Vydehinagar,^{Vanasthalipuram'l{5'derabad' r}

¶74

...ResPondents/ Accused^No'1

¶75

JOINT^[{EMO

¶76

The complainant^{and accused No. 2 to 5 rubmitsthere jointpetition as under}

¶77

It is submitted^{that the Accusedand cornplainant have amicablysettled the} dispute^{at the interventionof elders and well wishers and the matter has been} compromised^{betwebn them, Hence the both parties cameto corrpromisein FIR} No.28lof202lonthefileofVanasthalipuramPolicestationfortheoffencesunder section U/s'^{324,506IPC' 3(2) (va)' 3(r)GXs) scc sr PoA Acr 2015 and the} parties have^{no claim or rightsagainst ear:hotherin future'}

¶78

r B

¶79

It is just and nr cessary that this Hon'bre court may be preased to permir the \sf petitioner/ defact" comprainant to compond the offences u/s. 504, 506 Ipc,3(l) (D G),^{3 (2) (va)} SC sr^poA Act against the accused No.r'in cr.No. 281of 202r on the file of vanasl ralipuram police statio, Rachakonda porice commissionarate in the interest ofjus ice and pass such other order or orders .which may deem fit and proper in the circr mstances of the case.

¶80

Date::

¶81

Place:: Hyderabac

¶82

.T, d9 ---De-facro Eompta[ rlrtz Petitioner Accused \ No.l^s-L r, Y

¶83

€ 4 Cut C'ounsel for^petitioner

¶84

d€te

¶85

Counsel lor Accused

Mettupally Santosh Reddy v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mettupally Santosh Reddy v. The 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

G.G.Suresh Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Dr.a.Yogender Swamy Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Avinash Melwani and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Bendra Thirupathi Reddy Vs State of Telangana

Mandela Rajesh Vs The State of Telangana

Sama Sanjeev Reddy and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and Another