Allowed

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Dec 2021CRLP/8640/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a joint application for withdrawal of the compounding of offences and quashing of thecriminal petition after verifying the identities of the parties through the Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee and finding the dispute was amicably settled.

What did the court decide?

The I.A.Nos. 2 and 3 of 2021 and the Criminal Petition allowed; proceedings quashed subject to payment of Rs. 10,000 to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association.

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF^TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2021

¶7

IN/AND

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8640 OF²⁰²¹

¶9

Between:

¶10

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu, W/o Sri S. Sridhar Reddy, aged^{about 37 Years,} Occ. House Wife, R/o H.No.2-109, Thumkunta Village, Shameerpet^Mandal, Medchal District - 500 078.

¶11

Smt. Guduru Padmavathi @ G. Padma, Wo Sri G.^{Krishna Reddy, aged About} 55 Years, Occ. House Wife, R/o H.No.5-30/1/2, Bhavani^{Nagar,Nagaram,} Keesara Mandal, Medchal District^- 500 083.

¶12

Guduru Ram Chandra Reddy, S/o Sri G. Krishna^{Reddy, aged About 33 Years,} Occ. House Wife, R/o H.No.5-30/"1/2,^{Bhavani Nagar,Nagaram,Keesara} Mandal, Medchal District^- 500 083.

¶13

...Petitioners/Accused No.'l to 3

¶14

AND

¶15

The State of Telangana, Rep.by Public Prosecutor,^{HighCourt, Hyderabad -} 500 066.

¶16

. . . Res ponde nUCom plaina nt

¶17

Smt. Bhukya Vanitha, W/o Dr. L. Janardhan, aged^{about 37 years, Occ. House} Wife, RJo. H.No.5-30/2, Bhavani Nagar, Nagaram,^{KeesaraMandal,} Medchal District

¶18

...RespondenUDefacto Complainant

¶19

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the^{High Court may be pleased} to^quash the^proceedings in S.C.No.105 ol^{2021 on the file of the Hon'bleSpecial} Court for Trial of Cases Under SC and ST POA Act cum^{Vll ADJ, Ranga Reddy} District at L. B. Nagar.

¶20

LA.Nos.2&3of2021

¶21

Between:

¶22

Smt. Bhukya Vanitha, W/o Dr. L. Janardhan, aged about^{37 years, Occ. House} Wife, Rl/o. H.No.5-30/2, Bhavani Nagar, Nagaram, Keesara Mandal, It/edchal District

¶23

...Petitioner/R.2

¶24

AND

¶25

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu, W/o Sri S. Sridhar Reddy, aged about 37 Years, Occ. House Wife, R/o H.No.2-109, Thumkunta^{Village, Shameerpetlvlandal,} Medchal District - 500 078.

¶26

Smt. Guduru Par mavathi @^{G. Padma,W/o Sri G. Krishna Reddy, aged About} 55 Years, Occ. House Wfe,^{Fyo H.No.5-30/1/2,Bhavani Nagar,Nagaram,} Keesara Mandal, Medchal^{District - 500 083.}

¶27

Guduru Ram Ch rndra Reddy, S/o^{Sri G. Krishna Reddy,aged About 33.Years,} Occ. House W e, R/o H.No.5-30/1/2,^{Bhavani Nagar,Nagaram,Keesara} Mandal, Medcha District^- 500 083.

¶28

... Respondents/Petitioners

¶29

The State of Tela^.rgana, Rep.by Public^{Prosecutor, High Court,Hyderabad.}

¶30

. Res^ponden UResponde nt¹

¶31

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶32

Petition under S:ction 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying thatin the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition, the High Court rray be pleased} to permit the^petitione s to withdraw S.C.No.105^{oI 2021on the file of the Special} Court for Trial of Cas^rs Under SC and ST^{POA Act cum Vll r\DJ, Ranga Reddy} District at L. B. Nagar 'or the Offence under^{Sectionsof UnderSection 504, 506 of} IPC with Section 3 (2 (V)^(a) of SC / ST POA^{Act and pass :iuch other orderor} orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and^{proper in the circumstancesof the} case

¶33

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶34

Petition under S:ction 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the^{ci"cumstancesstated} in the Memorandum ol Grounds of Criminal Petition,^{the High Court may be pleased} to record the compron se between the Petitioner^{and the Respo n d e ntsiAccusedNo.} '1 to 3 herein and acqu t the Respondents /Accused No.1 to 3 herein S. C No. 105 of 2021 on the file of the Special Court for Trail of Cases under SC and ST POA^Act cum Vl ADJ, Ranga F:ddy District at L. B. Nagar against thesr,' Petitioners herein for Offences Punishab e Under Sec. 5404, 506 of IPC with Section 3^{(2) (V) (a)} of SC / ST POA and pas; such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the cir )umstances of the case.

¶35

This Petition c, ming on for hearing, upon^perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Singam Bhagaiah, Advocate f< r the Petitioner in Crl.P.No.864012021 and RR 1 to 3 in Both lA.Nos.2 & 312021 an, the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1 in Cil.P.864012021 and t.4 in Both l.A.Nos.2 & 312021 and of Sri G. Pavana Murthy, Advocate for the Resl ondent No.2 in Cr1.P.No.864012021 and {or the Petitioner in l.A.Nos.2 & 3 of 2021 .

¶36

The Court made the f< llowing: COMMON ORDER

¶37

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN}

¶38

I.A.Nos. 2and3^{of 2O2L} IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITI^{ON No'864ooF 2O2L}

¶39

COMM ON^ORDER:

¶40

This Criminal^{Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused} Nos.l to 3 to^{quash the proceedings in S'C'No'105of 2O2l on} the file of the^{SpecialCourt for Trial of CasesUnder SC & ST} (POA) Act - cum -^{VII Additional District Judge' Ranga Reddy} district at^{L.B.Nagar, relating to Cr'No'9O of 2027 of Keesara} Police Station,^{registered for the offences punishable under} Sections 504^{and 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(v)(a) of the} Scheduled Castes^{and the Scheduied Tribes (Prevention of} Atrocities)^Act,2015. 2. During the^{pendencyof the present Criminal Petition'} the parties^{have compromisedthe matter and' accordingly'} respondent^No.2-d.e facto^{complainant filed I'A'Nos2 and 3 of} 2O2l to^{permit her tocompoundthe offences and to} compromise^{the case in S'C'No' 105 of 202 1'}

¶41

.)a Vide order^{dated 07.12'2021, this Court' after recording} the submissions^{made by the learned counsel for the} petitioners^{as weil as respondent No'2' directed the parties to} appear^{before the Secretary'TelangalaHigh CourtLegal} Services^{Committee, Hyderabad'on or before20'72'2021 for} their identification^{and also directed the Secretary to submit a} report by^{20.12'2021'In compliance with the said order}

¶42

dated 07,1'.',,202L, the Secretary has submitt,:d his report dated 15.12 2O2l .

¶43

In the report of the Secretary, Telanganrl High Court Legal Servi es Committee, Hyderabad, it is stated that in obedience o the orders dated 07.12.202I. the petitrioners and the 2nd resp rndent have appeared before him along u,ith their counsel ar d on examination and verification of their particulars iom their Aadhar Cards, they were tailied. Thus the identific rtion of both the parties has been est.ablished. 5. The j ,arties herein have filed a joint memo oI compromise The said joint memo of comprornise and the report of the Secretary are placed on record.

¶44

The jo nt memo would reveal that the 2.d respondent Iodged a reJ ort against the petitioners herein/Accused Nos.1 to 3 which i r registered as a case in Cr.No.9O ol' 2Ct21 by the Police, Keesi ra Police Station and the sarne was nurrbered as S.C.No.1O5 ,f 2021 on the file of the Special Court Ibr Trial of Cases Unde : SC & ST (POA) Act - cum - VllA.dditional District Juc 3e,^{Ranga Reddy} district at L.B.Nagar. During pendency of the said case at the instance of the: elders, they have settled ihe disputes between them amicably and she has no objection to quash the proceedings against ttLe pretitioners herein/A. 1 t , A.3 in S.C.No. lO5 of 2O2t. 7 . In viern the said report of the Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal lervices Committee, Hyderabad and a-lso in view of the com >romise entered between the petitioners and

¶45

¶46

respondent No.2, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2021 are aliowed. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in S.C.No.105 of 2021 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of Cases Under SC & ST (POA) Act - cum - VII Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy district at L.B.Nagar, are hereby quashed against the petitioners herein/A. 1 to A.3 subject to payment of an amount of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten 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.

¶47

As a sequel, the miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, sha1l stand closed.

¶48

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶49

,TRUE COPY//

¶50

SECTION OFFICER

¶51

Note: As oer order of^{the Hon'ble Courta sumof Rupees 10,000/'} iJn iirouianO^{paidby the Singam Bhagaiah, Advocatetowards} Telanoana Advocate!^{Association on 23.'l2.2021} Vide R-eceipt No.52653^{enclosed herewith}

¶52

To,

¶53

The Special Court^{for Trial of Cases under SC & ST POA Act} -cum-^{Vll ADJ,Ranga} Reddv District at L.B.^Naqar.

¶54

2 one CC to Sri Sinqam^{Bhaqaiah, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶55

3 One CC to Sri G.^{Favana[,4urthy,Advocate} [OPUC]

¶56

4 i*o CCs to tne-public^{Prosecut'or,High Couh for th'e State of Telanganaat Hyderabad.} IOUTI

¶57

5 i-he Secretary, Telangana^{HighCourt Advocates Association, Hyderabad'}

6 Two CD Copies

7 One Spare Copy

s br .p-

HIGH COURT

DATED:^20,,1112021

COMMON^{O iDER}

l.A.Nos.2 an^{J 3 of 2021} IN/AND CRLP.No.86^{40 of 2021}

¶65

i,t,. ,
I I ,nu zlzz

¶66

ALLOWING^{THE l.A.Nos.2 & 3 of 2021} AND CRIMII{AL^PETITION

¶67

¶68

f-tza

¶69

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA:}IYDERABAD} h CRL.P. No. fuur"^{OF 2)zl}

¶70

¶71

(s.c. No. ' 105 of2021 on^{the file of the Hon'ble Specialcourtfor Trial of cases undersc & sT} POA Act cum VII^{ADJ, Ranga Reddy Disfiictat L' B Nagar)}

¶72

Between:

¶73

Srrrt Singireddy^{HimabindhuWo Sri S. Sridhar Reddy,} aged about 37 Year,^{Occ: House Wife,} R/o H. No. 2-109,^{Thumkunta Village,}

¶74

Shameerpet Mandal,^{MedchalDistrict} -^{500 078'}

¶75

Smt. Guduru Padmavathi @^{G. PadmaW/o Sri G Krishna Reddy'} aged About 55^{Year, Occ: House Wife,} iv-'o FL iio, 5-31lilz,Bhavari^{Nagar,iiagamm,}

¶76

Keesara Mandal,^{MedchalDistrict} -^{500 083.}

¶77

3, Guduru Ram Chandra^{Reddy S/o Sri G. KrishnaReddy,} aged About 33Year,^{Occ: House Wife,}

¶78

R/ cr I{" No. 54)ll/2^{Blravani Nagar, Nagaram,} . ..Petitioners/^{Accused No, I to 3}

¶79

Keesara Mandal,^{MedchalDistrict} -^{500 083.}

¶80

¶81

The State of Telangana, Represented bY Public^Prosecutor,

¶82

High Court for the^{State ofTelangana,Hyderabad} -^{500 066'} ... .ResPondent /^ComPiainant'

¶83

Smt. Bhukya Vanitha^{Wo Dr. L. Janardhan,} aged about 37^{year, Occ: House Wife,} R/ o H, No. 5-30/2,^{Bhavani Nagar, N6gararn,} Keesara Mandat,^{MedchalDistrict} -^{500 08 3. ... . Respondent/Defacto-complainant.} lotNr65up^R OMIS MEMO FILED^{ONBEHALF OF THE} PET IONER /ACCUSED^NO 3AN THE 2ND RES ENT

¶84

i . it is submifieii that^{due to intei-ueiitioi.r uf the eldorsa:td *e1l--wishersof tiie} petitioners/Accused No. 1 to 3 and the 2nd Respondent / comflainant^{herein, boththe} parties have compromised^{andresolved the issue out of the Courtas compromise'}

¶85

2 Hence this^joint compromise^{Memofiled by the Petitioners/AccusedNo.1 to 3 and} the 2,,d Respondent^{hereinby recordingthe said compromise acquit the Petitioners/Accused} No 1 to 3 herein in S,c.^{No. 105 of 2021 on the file of the Hon'hle -Special co$rt for Trial} of Cases Under SC^{& ST POAAct cum VII ADJ, RangaReddyDistrict at L' B Nagarfor} the otTence under^{Sections of UnderSection 504, 506 of Ipc} i^{with section3 (2) (V) (a) of} sc i sT PoA Act^{aiidpass such othei oder or onders as tlis Hon'ble Courtmay- deem fit}

¶86

and proper in the^{circumstancesof the case. Hence this} t.^{s Brr\a-|'n} \rflfP?#$/ Petitioners/Accused^{No' 11}

¶87

emo

¶88

e. ,? Counsel tor the Petitioners ; Counsel 6;Rffi',",

¶89

BV^"t'1"**

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Singireddy Himabindhu 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

Mohammed Abdul Mujeeb Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd Shafeeq Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana