Allowed

Mohammed Abdul Mujeeb v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Dec 2021CRLP/8127/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed compounding of offences and quashed criminal proceedings under subsections (2) and (6) of Section 320 Cr.P.C. following a settlement between the complainant and accused, subject to the payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Complaint CC No. 119 of 2021 and Criminal Petition allowed and quashed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000 to the Advocates Association within ten days.

Mohammed Abdul Mujeeb Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

|.A.NOS. 3 AND 4 0F 2021 IN/AND

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8127 OF 2021

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8127 OF 2021

¶9

Between:

¶10

Mohammed Abdul Mujeeb, S/o. Late. Shaik Ameen, Aged about 63 Years, Occ.Unemployee, R/o. H. No. 6-1-342, Padma Rao Nagar, Secunderabad^- 500025.

¶11

...Petitioner/Accused

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶14

...RespondenURespondent

¶15

2 Mohammed Omar Faisal, S/o. Mohammed Abdul Qyoom, Aged about 47 Years, Occ. Un-Employee, F/o. H.No.6-1-342, Padma Rao Nagar, Secunderabad^- 500025.

¶16

...RespondenuDefacto Complainant

¶17

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 C.C. No. 119 of 2021 on the^{file X Additional Chief} Metropolitan Magistrate City Civil Court Complex, at Secunderabad and^quashthe sa me

¶18

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶19

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 grant stay of all further proceedings including the arrest of the Petitioner/Accused in CC No. 119 ot 2021 on the file X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate^City Civil Court Complex, at Secunderabad,^pending the disposal of the Criminal^Petition.

¶20

Common CTs in l./ .Nos.3 and 4 of 2021 in Criminal Petition

¶21

Between:

¶22

Mohammed⁽ rmar Faisal, S/o. Mohammed Abdul Qyoom, Aged about 47 years, Occ. Un-Em1 loyee, R/o. H.No. 6-1-342, Padma Rao Nagdr, Secunderabad - 500025,

¶23

..Petitioner/Respondent No.2(Defacto Complainant)

¶24

AND

¶25

1 The State of^- elangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telar gana, at Hyderabad.

¶26

.. . Responde nt/Res pondent No.1

¶27

2 Mohammed I rdul Mujeeb, S/o. Late. Shaik Ameen, Aged about 63 Years, Occ.Unemplo 'ee, Fyo. H. No.6-1-342, Padma Rao Nagar, Secunderabad - 500025.

¶28

...RespondenUPetitioner/Accused

¶29

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶30

Petition unde Section 320 (6) Read with 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances state I in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pler sed to permit the Petitioner herein/Defacto Complainant to compound the offer ce registered under Sections 211 of IPC Complaint vide CC No.119 of 2021 on ihe file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate City Civil Court, at Secundera )ad against the Respondent No. 2/Accused.

¶31

l.A. NO: 4 OF 2021

¶32

Petitron unde Section 320 (2) Read with 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances state, in the Affidavit and Joint Memo of Compromise filed therewith, the High Court may 'e pleased to record the compromise between the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 herern /Accused and quash the Criminal iomplaint vide CC No.1"l9 of 2021 on he file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate City Civil Court Complex, at S rcunderabad.

¶33

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the irrlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri H. Sudhakara Rao, Advocate for .he Petitioner in Criminal Petition and Respondent No_2 in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2(21 and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in Criminal Petition rnd l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2021 and of M/s Prabhakar Sripada, Advocate for the Re :pondent No.2 in Criminal Petition and Petitioner in l.A.Nos.3 and 4 ot 2021 .

¶34

The Court made the bllowing: COMMON ORDER

¶35

¶36

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶37

I.A. Nos.3 &,4 ot202t IN/AND CRIMINALPETI TIONNo .8727oY 2027

¶38

CO MMON ORDER

¶39

This Criminal petition is filed by the petitioner/accused to quash the proceedings in the above said case in C.C.No.119 of 2O2l on the file of the X Additiona.l Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Civil Court complex at Secunderabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 211,498 and 500 ofIpC.

¶40

During the pendency of the present Criminal petition, the parties have compromised the matter and, accordingly, respondent No.2_de facto complainant filed I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2O2l to permit him to compound the offences and to compromise the case in C.C.No. 119 of 2021.

¶41

Vide order dated 07. 12.2O21, this Court, after recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as weil as respondent No.2, directed the parties to appear before the Secretary, Telaagana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, on or before 17 .12.2O2t for their identification and also directed the Secretary to submit a report by 12.12.2021. In compliance with ilre said order dated OZ.t2.2O2t, the Secretary has submitted his report dated 15.12.2O21.

¶42

In the report^{of the Se cretary,Telangan:rHigh Court} Legal Servi',es Committee,^{Hyderabad, itis stated that in} obedience c'the^{orders dated 07.12.2021,the petitionerand} the 2'd resr )ndent^{have appeared before him along with their} counsel ar d on^{examination and verification oftheir} particuiars lrom their Aadhar^{Cards, they were tallied'Thus} the identific r.tion^{of both the parties has been established'} 5. The larties^{herein have filed a jointmemoof} compromist. The^{said joint memo of compromiseand the} report of thr Secletary^{are placed on record'}

¶43

The a fidavit filed by^{the 2"d respondent wouldreveal} that the 2"' respondent^{filed a complaint under Section 190} and 200 of lr.P.C.^{before the X Additional Chief Metropolitan} Magistrate, City Civil Court^{complexat Secunderabad,for the} offences purishable under^{Sections211, 498 and 500 of IPC} against the petitioner^{herein/Accusedwhich is numbered as} C.C.No.119 of 202L. During^{pendencyof the saidcase at the} instance of fie elders,^{they have settledthe disputesbetween} them amic rbiy and he^has no^{objection to quash the} proceedings against the^{petitioner herein/ accused in} C.C.No.179 of 2O21.

¶44

In vie's the said report^{of the Secretary, Telangana High} Court Legai Services^{Committee, Hyderabad and also in view} of the cot tpromise entered^{between the petitionerand} respondent No.2, I.A.Nos.3^{and 4 are allowed. Consequently,} the Crimir: al Petition is allowed^{and the proceedings in}

¶45

C.C.No. 179 of 2021 on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Civil Courr complex at Secunderabad, are hereby quashed against the petitioner herein/accused subject to payment of an amount of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates, Association, Hyderabad, within ten (10) days from today, and file proof of the same into the Registry. 8. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶46

¶47

SD/- N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR h.-'

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The X Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate city civil court complex, at Secunderabad.

¶52

The station House officer, chirakaraguda porice station, secunderabad. 3. Two ccs to the Pubric prosecutor, High court for the state of retanjani, at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶53

The Secretary, Telangana High court Advocates' Association, High court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad

¶54

One CC to Sri Prabhakar Sripada, Advocate tOpUCl 6. One CC to Sri H. Sudhakara Rao, Advocate tbpUCi

¶55

Two CD Copies

¶56

(Along with a copy of the Joint Memo)

MMK

Cost Memo:

1"1e19; Amount paid by H. sudhakara Rao, towards imposed by cost of Rs.5,000r (Five thousand) to Terangana High court Advocates Aisociation, Hyderabad.

¶61

Receipt No. 52503, Date:21 .12.2021

HIGH COURT

OATEDi20l12l2O21

COMMON ORDER

l.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of^2t21 ln/and CRLP.No.8127 ol^20l1

¶66

-jrffi-<br>,/ <br>o 'i)
i.) 2 $ r}Fc 2|]n ; rl
-]

¶67

ALLOWING I HE l.A.Nos.3^{AND 4 OF 2021 AND} ALLOWING^"]'HE CRTMINAL^PETITION

¶68

G'-,,-
SV

¶69

¶70

urudmruouM^{oF cRTMTNAL P-ErITroN} '''^-'' l' iu nJ.""o''.H? 3+:il'3'r rrnuoo rN THE^{nreu'couRtto.lru"oo}

¶71

Ll oF 2021 I.A.NO II,l CRL.P.No- flq)^{oF 2021}

¶72

Between:

¶73

Mohammed^OmarFaisal .il ilii,n...."0^{Abdul Qvoom'Aged^a.bout 47 Yeats} #iilil;l"r*d,^{n/o' n'ruo' 6'L-342} Padma^{Rao Nagar} Secunderabad^{- 500025}

¶74

..Petitioner/ ResPondent (Defacto^ComPlainant)

¶75

AND

¶76

1 The State^{of Telangana'} ^' e"o. bv lts Public Prosecutor'

¶77

;U; 6rrt^{for the State of Telangana} at HYderabad'

¶78

.ResPondent No' 1
...ResPondent No' 2/ .
Petitioner(Accused )

¶79

Mohammed^{Abdul Mujeeb} S/o Late.^{Shaik Ameen'Agedab-out63 Years}

¶80

o; l.'N".^{6-7'342Padma RaoNagar} Secunderabad^{- 500025}

¶81

TtSrg._uw

¶82

r It is submitted^{that the Petitionerancl the Respondent No'2 have resolved'their} iiff",.n..,^{and disputes' -r;;ti:'til;;'has no claims']g;intfth"Respondent No'2} ie.iri.o^{.i$,"t civil or criminal'}

¶83

) rhe Petitioner^{does not have anv obj:Siol^'i-9i.:?:u[N3i'i:I',.t3,,||3:"1} '"; . ii.=Ji;0.;oi"^{i mar chief Metropolitan Ma9rstEre} is^{quashed w} iv^{bv thisiriu ion Hon'bteor. utboutt'} secunderabad^{against tne} 'i$;;il;il;izlRccused ;-:, Z;;l:ti:;ffirlporitun^{:'FIttlt}#"ls':?il;tri*+hff#'ii':':rl*} Masistiate citv civii c:YT"t:iH?,.",i.*."r of the case. ;#n ;t.;^{oiJt..o' orders niav deem fit and proper tn}

¶84

Hence,^{this lointMemo'}

¶85

nt
n
n
(De acto Complai ant)
/
{oun for P titioner
Place : HYderabad
Date : 02-11-2021

¶86

e tioner .ResPon^en (Accused)

¶87

Counsel k*.0.*

Mohammed Abdul Mujeeb v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Abdul Mujeeb 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

Regonda Krishna Vs The State of Telangana

Mettupally Santosh Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and another

Md.Yousuf Kaleem Vs The State of Telangana

C.Revathi Vs P.Vittal Reddy

Mohd Shafeeq Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu Vs The State of Telangana