Allowed

Vajinepalli Radha Krishna and Another v. Vasa Diya and Another

Telangana HC5 Dec 2022CRLP/5296/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana, on a Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashed criminal proceedings based on a compromise deed submitted by the parties. A joint memo of compromise was filed regarding offences under Section 498-A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act.赔偿责任 was fixed. The proceedings against the accused were quashed following the legal services committee report confirming identit

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No. 3056 of 2021 were quashed. Respondent accused ordered to pay Rs. 10,000 to Sainik Welfare.

Vajinepalli Radha Krishna and Another Vs Vasa Diya and… — Domestic Violence | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5296 OF 2021

¶6

ALONG WITH l.A.Nos. 2 AND 3 oF 2022

¶7

QRIII^{INAL PET|TION} NO: 5296 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 Vajinepalli Radha Krishna, S/o V.Satyavardhan, aged about 53 years, Occ. Business R/o. H No. B-3-163 Srikrishna Colony, Station Road, Warangal (A-5)

¶10

Vajinepalli Sumangali, Wo. V. Radha Krishna, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Hose wife, H.No. 8-3-163, Srikrishna Colony, Station Road, Warangal. (A-6)

¶11

... Petitioners/Accused

¶12

AND

¶13

Vasa Diya, Wo. Athmakuru Shashank, Aged about 23 years, Occ. House wife, Plot No.6B, W.P., K.V.N. Reddynagar, Near Balajinagar, Hayathnagar Hyderabad.

¶14

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

¶15

... Respondents/Complai nant

¶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 quash all further proceedings in C.C.No. 3056 of 2021 on the lile of the V Addl Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, in the interest of^justice.

¶17

I.A. NO: 1OF 2021

¶18

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 stay all further proceedings including appearance of the^petitioners in C.C.No 3056 of 2021 on the file of the V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶19

This Petition coming on for hearing, upor perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petrtion and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T. ANIR{JDH REDDY ,Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Add tional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondent No 2 and of Sri K L B KU[/IAR, Advocate for the Respondent No.1

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

l.A.Nos. 2 AND 3 OF 2022

¶22

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2022

¶23

Between:

¶24

Smt. Vasa Diya, '///o Athrnakuru Saashank, Aged about 23 years, Occ House wife, Plot No 68, W.P , K V N. Reddynagar, Near Balajinagar, Hayathnagar. Hyderabad.

¶25

...Petitioner/Defacto-Complainant

¶26

AND

¶27

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

¶28

...Respondents/Complainant

¶29

Vajinepalli Radha Krishna, S/o V.Satyavardhan, aged about 53 years, Occ Business R/o. H No 8-3-163 Srkrishna Colony, Station Road, Warangal.

¶30

Vajinepalli Sumangali, Wo. V Radha Krishna, Aged about 54 years, Occ Hose wife, H.No B-3-163, Srikrlshna Colony, Station Road, Warangal.

¶31

-. Respondent No.2 and 3/Accused no. 5 and 6

¶32

Petition under Section 320(6) of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition ,the High Court may be pleased pleased to permit the petitioneri defacto- complainant to compound the offences and quash the proceedings against the respondentsaccused. no.5 and 6 in C C.No. 3056, of 2021 on the flle of the V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga ReCdy District

¶33

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2022

¶34

Between:

¶35

Smt Vasa Diya, Wo. Athmakrru Shashank, Aged about 23 years, Occ. House wife, Plot No.68, W P.. K V N Reddynagar, Near BatSiinagar, Hayathnagar. Hvderabad.

¶36

...Petitioner/Defacto-Complainant

¶37

t,/

¶38

AND

¶39

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

¶40

... Respondents/Complainant

¶41

Vajinepalli Radha Krishna, S/o. V.Satyavardhan, aged about 53^years, Occ. Business R/o. H.No B-3-163 Srikrishna Colony, Station Road, Warangal.

¶42

Vajinepalli Sumangali, Wo. V. Radha Krishna, Aged about 54^years, Occ Hose wife, H.No. 8-3-163, Srikrishna Colony, Station Road, Warangal.

¶43

...Respondent No.2 and 3/Accused no. 5 and 6

¶44

Petition under Sectron 320(2) ot Cr.P C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the compromise between the petitioner/defacto-complainant and respondent.no.2 and 3/accused.no. 5 and 6 and thereby^quash the proceedings of CC.No 3056 of 2021 on the frle of the V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate. L B Nagar. R.R District

¶45

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petation and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K L^B KUMAR,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1 and of Sri T ANIRUDH REDDY, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1& 2

¶46

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶47

-7

¶48

THE HOIVOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶49

ALatrqgIIH -1.$_.!os.2^{and 3 oF 2o22}

¶50

COMMON ORD}TR:

¶51

This Crimrnal Petition is liled rinder Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.3056 of 2021, on the file of V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioner herein are accused in the said case. The offences alleged against the petitioner herein are under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶52

Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides and learned Additiorral Public Prosr:cutor for the State. Perused the record.

¶53

During the pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and, accordingly, respondent No..2-de rfizcto complainant filed I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 to permit them to compound the offences ald to compromise the case.

¶54

Vide order- dated 23.11.2.022, this Court, after recording the submissior-rs made br- the ,learned counsel for the

¶55

¶56

' K'J Crl.Petition No.5295 of 2021 Along with l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 2

¶57

petitioners as well as respondent No.2, directed the parties to appear before the Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, for their identification and also directed the Secretary to submit a report by 05.12.2022. In compliance with the said order, the Secretary has submitted his report, on 29.1 ),.2022.

¶58

In the report of the Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, it is stated that in obedience of the orders dated 23. 11.2022, the petitioners and the 2.d respondent have appeared before him along with their counsel and on examination and verification of their particulars from their Aadhar Cards, they were ta-llied. Thus the identilication of both the parties has been established.

¶59

The parties herein have filed a joint memo of compromise stating that they have agreed among themselves to compromise and resolve all the disputes, they have settled the disputes between them amicably and 2"d respondent has no objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein in the above Calendar Case. The said joint memo of compromise and the report ofthe Secretary are placed on record.

¶60

Crl-Petition No.5295 of 2021 Along with l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022

¶61

7 . In view of tl-re said report of the Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad and also in view of the compromise entered between the petitioners and respondent No.:2, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 are allowed. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allor.ved and the proceedings in C.C.No.3056 of 2027, on the file of V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District., against the petitioners;-Accused are hereby quashed, petitioners have undertaken to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand Onll,) in favour of Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad, (Savinl3s A/c.No. 52LAA926279, State Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch & 2OO7O, IFSC Code: SBIN002OO7O, I\4ICR No. 500004057), within a period of one week from today, and file proof of the same into the Registry.

¶62

As a sequel, the miscellaneous- Petitions, pending il aly,

¶63

shall stand closed

¶64

Sd/.T. JAYASREE / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR^/ //TRUE COPY// yL' SECTION OFFICER

¶65

To,

¶66

¶67

V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, L.B.Nagar, R.R.District

¶68

The Station House Officer, Womens Police Station,^Cyberabad, Rachakonda.

¶69

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(oUT)

¶70

One CC to SRl. T S ANIRUDH REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶71

One CC to SRl. K L B KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶72

Two CD Copies

¶73

Note: Amount Rs.10,000(Rupees l-en Thousand Only) has been paid by SRI K.L.B. KUMAR, as directed by the Hon'ble Court order dated:05-12-20221o the Director Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad and filed memo vide proof of Compliance USR No.3221 /2023 dated:09-01^-2023

kam ."--

I i { t i

I j

rti,.
oil(
-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0511212022

COMMON ORDER

CRLP.No.5296 of 2021 ALONG WlTl-[ l.A.Nos" ?- & 3 of 2022

¶83

r(.
i)
2 7 JAil 208
!l
.i
'ic!l

¶84

.\ I,I,()\1-ING TI{ I], CRIMINA L I,El.ITIONS

ra)
_l-l
n^tr
\z

f
#
<br>

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA . ATHYDI,RABAD

¶89

CRL.P.NO. 5296 0F 2021 Against

¶90

(C.C.No.3056 of 2021 on the file ol'the

¶91

V'Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Rcddy District)

¶92

Betrveen:

¶93

I Vajinepalli Radha Krishna, S/o. V.Satyavardhan; aged about 53 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No. 8-3-163,

¶94

Srikrishna Colony, Station Road, Warangal

¶95

2 Vajinepalli Sumangali, Wo. V.liadha Krishna, Aged about 54^years, Occ: I{ouse wife, R/o. H.No. 8-3-163, Srikishna Colony, .... Petitioner/Accused-no.5 and 6

¶96

Station Road, Warangal. AND

¶97

l. The State of Telangana,

¶98

Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State ofTelangana, At Hyderabad .

¶99

. . ...Rcspondent.No- I /Cornplainant

¶100

2 Smt.Vasa Dilya Wo. Athmakuru Shashank, Aged about 23 years, Occ: House wife, R./o. Plot No.68, W.P., K.V.N. Reddynagar,

¶101

Near Balajinagar, Hayathnagar, FIyderabad..

¶102

. . .. l(espondent.No.2/ Delhct+Cornplainant

¶103

JOINT MEMO FILE,D ON ItIillALF OF THE l'h'l ll lO[ll AND 2NI., IiESI,0NDItNT

¶104

l. The petitioner and the 2nd resporrrle nt in C.C.No.305(r ol'202 I on the file of the V Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, L.B.Nagar, I{anga Reddy l)istrict, for an offences under section 498-A,323,506 of IPC and section I & 4 ol Dorvry Prohibition Act., have settled the above case amicably at the instance ol'elders and well wishers. The petitioners and the dethcto-complaiuant rvho is the respondent No.2 also filed their aflldavits to that effect hefirre this Ilon'ble Court.

¶105

¶106

2.' The petitioner and the 2,d rcspontlepl subnrit that at the instance of elders and well wishers dre matter has becn settled out of the court arnicably and entered into a Me lll orandum of Urxlcrsraoding, dt: 3 I _07 -2022.

¶107

In vierv ol the compromisc, the Proceedings of the said criminal case t.g,Nvide C.C .No.3056 o1. 2021 on rhe file o/ rhc V Addl. Metropolitan Ivlagislrate, agar, I{anga l(ed<Jy Districr. niav be quashed petiri against the termboners/Accuscd.no 5 and 6 by alk-rwing thc petition and by recording the of the comprornise.

¶108

¶109

Hence this Joint Memo. d^4--, Petit.ioner.no.l De^l) ) 3ur-',^.r..n.,.,^ PetitioneYno.2 Counsel ,MP*-r,,""". Clourtrcl f Respondent No.2

¶110

Date: [ \ -09-2022 Place rHyderabad

¶111

¶112

¶113

MEMOI(ANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETI1ION (U/SEC 4 .c)

¶114

IN 11IE I{I(iH C FOI{ 1't{E S 1T^'fELANGANA A1'HYD AL) cRL. P. No.^5291b or ro^

¶115

¶116

¶117

c.c.NO. 3056 0F 202t on the file of the V Addl. Metropolitii-Migistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Iteddy District.

¶118

Between: l. Vajinepalti Radha l(rishna, (A s) S/o. V.Satyavardhan, aged about 53 years, fl^-r. Occ: Busine;9,JUo. H.No, 8-3- 163, Srikrishna Colony, Station Road, (,.^$,' Warangal. 2 Vajinepalli Sumangali, Wo. V.Radha Krishna, (A-6) Aged about 54 years, Occ: Llouse wife, _--R/o. H.No. 8-3- l6l, Srikrishna Colony, Station Iload, Warangal.

¶119

.. Petitioners/Accused Aud I Vasa Diya Wo. Athmakuru Slrashank, Aged aborrt 23^years. Occ: House wife, ---" lVo. Plot No.6tt, W.P., K.V.N, Reddynagar, Near Balaj inagar, Ilayathnagar, Ilyderabad. 2. 'fhe State o( feliurgrna, Rep. by its ['ublic I'rosccutor, -,-"' High Court tbr the State ol"l'elangana at Hyderabird.

¶120

.. . Respondens/ Complainant 'fhe address tirr rccs ol all notices and processes on the above petitioners are that of tllcir c sel Mr-^'l'. Anirudh Reddy, Advocate, # 13, Law Charnbers, [{igh Court lluiltl in lJv(lc'rahtd

¶121

'l-he pctitioncrs irrc ?-5 ilnd lt-6 C.C.No. 3056 o1'2021 on the llle of the V Adtll. Metropolitan^{Nlasistrate. CYI)cra} at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District A chargeshcet has beett Iilcd^{againsttlte pe} ioners and tbur others tbr olfences punishable undcr seclions l9ti-A. 506 oi I and section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Vajinepalli Radha Krishna and Another v. Vasa Diya and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vajinepalli Radha Krishna and Another v. Vasa Diya 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

Ayyalapu Vijayendar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Thadkamalla Saroja and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Thadkamalla Harshavardhan Vs The State of Telangana and another

Gulam Khaja Moinuddin and another Vs The State Telangana and another

Yadma Sridhar Reddy, And 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana, And Another

Smt. Petluru Vasundara Devi and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana and another