Allowed

Sudhendra Baru v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Mar 2023CRLP/10190/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. alleging dowry harassment. The High Court allowed the petition and quashed proceedings due to a settlement and mutual consent divorce agreement between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Proceedings (C.C. No. 901 of 2021) against petitioners were quashed; petitioners directed to pay Rs. 10,000 to Telangana HITAA as cost.

Sudhendra Baru Vs The State of Telangana — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

l I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE^TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND rWEr.rri IHREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE K.SURENDER .A.No .2AND 30F 2023 IN D CRIMI NAL PETITtoN NO: 10190 0F 2022

¶5

Between:

¶6

' ff1;ii;;t3;3liq{#H{i3fr^{Ii?[ift# F^Birf} t$.si

¶7

, 6::iiJJ:3#€:%#'_" . of .sudhendra Baru, Ii^{j5,",,,=i'x;*'ltiE"*i:q8lP,,f,ifl'91,,E[.S{'dtJR?}

¶8

'ilip,#sd*,i"1;,?,iirur5;3ffi

¶9

^?3r!;#n??iiRtl#i-,,-,,i;;

¶10

resident of plot No.C, lro i-r_i n-e rb:. d#;LrRi "!,,il i3ilrf

¶11

en ts, Roa d 3 ##m ^??1,5',,1X!

¶12

^??1,5',,1X!

¶13

-^ffi 4. Raghavendra, S/o. I ffir,run'H.rpri,p,x,r*:I+"8;,i"gfrni

¶14

AND

¶15

...PET|TIONERS/ACCUSED 2 ro 4

¶16

'ii!ftEri,#ii:;HfrJ;ffi*,J,#'rs8x:#???T,,.rHishc.u.

¶17

'r,xlitk"t'x#yn:Hi:lli"liiifl 2. Smt.Neha Rambafla. t/ ',i31i33x13,u1'""4ff i,'"',?

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶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 quash the C.C.No.9O1of 2021 pending on the file of the Court of XXI ttl1etropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad in respect of petitioners 2 to 4.

¶20

l.A. NO: 1OF 2022

¶21

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 in C.C.No.901 of 202lpending on the file of the Court of XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad including^personal appearance of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶22

l.A. NO: 2 &3 OF 2023

¶23

Between:

¶24

Smt.Neha Rambatla, Wife of Raghavendra Rao Baru,^{Aged about28} years, Occ.Housewife Resident of H.No.13-6-4341C14, Maruthi Nagar, Mehdipatnam Ring Road, Hyderabad.

¶25

.,.PETITIONERiRESPONDENT NO.2

¶26

AND

¶27

Sudhendra Baru, Son of late Subba Rao Baru,^{Aged about 62 years,} Occ. Government Employee, resident of Plot^{No.C-26,Flat No.106,Sai} Krishna Apartments, Road No.3, Lane 715, Kamala^{Nagar, ECILX} Roads, Hyderabad

¶28

Annapurna Baru, Wife of Sudhendra Baru, Aged^{about 55 years,} Occ.Housewife, resident of Plot No.C?6,^{Flat No.106, Sai Krishna} Apartments, Road No.3, Lane 715, Kamala Nagar,^ECIL X^Roads, Hyderabad

¶29

Sudha Parimala Baru, D/o.Sudhendra^{Baru, Aged about 32 years,} Occ.Private Employee, Temporarily^{ResidentofH.No.Markt-205'} Hengelo, Overijssel^(0V) 7551CH,^Netherland.

¶30

resident of Plot No.C-26, Flat^{No.106, Sai KrishnaApartments, Road} No.3, Lane 715, Kamala Nagar,^{ECIL X Roads, Hyderabad}

¶31

Raghavendra, S/o. Sudhendra Baru, {Oe, .^{S.p yeafs.r} 9..,. ..p^t Em-ployee, Temporary Fl/o. 288, Spencer St, Melborne,^{Victoria (VlC),} Australia. Permartent Rl/o. Plot No.C-26, Flat No.106, Sai Krishna Apartments, Road No.3, Lane 715, Kamala Nagar, ECIL X Roads, Hyderabad.

¶32

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS NO. 1 TO 4

¶33

The State of Telangana, represented by Public prosecutor, High Court qt Hyderabad, Hyderabad, through Sub-lnspector of^- police, Shameerpet P.S., Ranga Reddy District.

¶34

...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶35

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 to pass orders permitting the petitioner / 2nd respondent to compound the offence as settle out of Court and quash the CC.No.901 of 2021 pending on the file of Hon'ble XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cybqrabad.

¶36

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2023

¶37

Petition under Section 320(6) of Cr.P.C. Rlw 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 pass orders compound the offence as settled out of Court and quash the CC.No.90 1 of 2021 pending on the file of Hon'ble XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad.

¶38

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. M. SAMEER HUSSAIN, Advocate for the petitioners and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.^.l and of Sri A. NAVEEN REDDY, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2

¶39

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶40

t i t' t

¶41

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶42

I.A.NOs.2 AND 3 OF 2023IN AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.lO19O OF 2022

¶43

COMMON ORDER:

¶44

This Crinrinal Petition is filed under Section 4g2 Cr.p.C., to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.9O 1 of 2021, pending on the file of XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498-A of Indian^penal Code ald Sections 3 and 4 of Dowr_v Prohibition Act.

¶45

Heard learned counsr_'l appearing on both sides and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. perused the record.

¶46

During the pendency of the present Criminal petition, the parties have contpromised the matter and, accordingly, the parties herein have filed I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023 to permit them to compound the offences and compromise the matter.

¶47

Vide order clated 02.03.2023, this Court, after recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as rvell as respondent No.2, directed the parties to appear before the Secretan,, Telangana High Court Legal

\ ".?;r -E..\

Services Committee, Hyderabad, for their^{identification and also} directed the Secretary to^{submita report by 23.03.2023.In} compliance with the^{said order, the Secretaqr has submitted his} report, on 20.O3.2O23.

¶52

In the report of the Secretary, Telangana^{High CourtLegal} Services Committee, Hyderabad, it is stated that in obedience^to the orders dated 02.03.2023, the petitioners are present and the 2"d respondent have appeared before him along with their counsel and on examinatirjn and verification of their particulars from their Aadhar Cards, they were tallied.

¶53

The 2"a respondent herein has liled a joint memo of compromise memo stating that they have settled the matter out of the Court and the 2"d respondent has no objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein in the above case. The said joint memo of compromise and the report of the Secretary are placed on record.

¶54

7 . In view of the said report of the Secretar5z, 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 2023 are allowed. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is a,llowed and the

¶55

¶56

proceedrngs rlr^{(l.C.No.t)01 ttl 2O21} ,^{pending on the lile of XXI} Metropolitan^{N{rrgistrate,N{erlclral at C-yberabad, agajnst the} petitioners - irccused^{Nrls l to 4are herebyquashed'} Petitioners/^{accu sedNos. Ito 4 have undertakento pay an} amount of Rs.l0,O00/^{(RupeesTen ThousandOnly) to the} 'lelangana High^{CourtAdvocates Association,Hyderabad"} within a period^{of ten davs from today, and file proof of the} same into^{the Registry.}

¶57

As a seque^{l, the miscellaneous} -Petitions,^{pending if any'} shall stand^closed. I

¶58

¶59

SD/- MOHD.ISMAII ASST5TANi neelsrnan

¶60

/ffRUE COPY// tJv SECTION OFFICER

¶61

To,

¶62

The XXlll^{Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad'}

¶63

TheStation^{HouseOfficer, ShamirpetPolice Station,Cyberabad'}

¶64

One CC to^{M/S. M. SAMEERHUSSAIN,Advocate[OPUC]}

¶65

One CC to^{Sri A. NAVEENREDDY,Advocate[OPUC]}

¶66

Two CCs^{to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of} Telangana at^{HYderabad.(OUT)}

¶67

Two CD CoPies

¶68

( ALONG wlTH A COPY^{OF JOINTMEMOOF COMPROMISE)}

Njb

Note :

Amount paid by M/S. M. SAMEER HUSSAIN, Counsel for the Petitioner towards imposed Cost of Rs.'10,000 /- (Rupees Ten thousand only ) Advocates directed bv the Association Hon'bre court and fired dated 24 Memo 03.2023 of proof of to the Telangana High compriarice n"J"iot r\r'."'rPtcourt-r.rl.r\L 67567 & USR No. 33320 of 2023 dated ze oa.i&i'. (^_-*

lE:** --

.tl

-.ir.l

HIGH COURT

DATED:2410312023

COMMON ORDER

l.A.NOs.2&3of 2023 IN/AND CRLP.No.10190 ot 2022

¶82

or I €1.
.$ 1,
o
s
ij-
+
;S
ttf n

¶83

ALLOWING THE I.A'S

¶84

AND CRIMINAL PETITION

¶85

u4 ao^6\23

¶86

¶87

IN THE FIIGH^{COURTF-ORTHESTATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDtrRABAD

¶88

Crl.P.No. 10190 OF'²⁰²²

¶89

Between:

¶90

1	Sudhendra Baru, SonoflateSubbaRaoBaru, Agedabout62 years, Occ:Retd.Governmenttrmploy	ee,
2	Annapurna Baru, Wifeof SudhendraBaru, Agedabout55years, Occ:Housewife,
	Sudha Parimala Baru, D/o.SudhendraBaru, Agedabout32 years, Occ:Private Employee, TemporarilyResidentof
	H.No.Markt-2O5,Hengelo, Overijssel(OV) 7551CH, Netherland.
4	RaghavendraRaoBaru Sonof SudhendraBaru, Agedabout35 years, Occ:PrivateEmployee, TemporaryResidentof 288Spencer Street, Melborne,Victoria(VIC),3000, AUSTRALIA	aJ .q.d :, !^.i i.,,i r::l -'., ,:

¶91

[A-ll^{are residents of} Plot No.C-26, Flat No.106, Sai Krishna AparLments, Road No.3, Lane Z /5, Kamald.N aE*, ECILX Roads Hyderabadl

¶92

i . . . Petitionefs Peiitigners No. 1 to 4

--rc-*

t<--5+*

AND

4 The State of Telanganzt, represented bY Public^Prosecutor, High Cou-"t^{at Hyderabad,Hyderabad,} through Sub-InSPector^{of Folice,} Shameerpet^{P.S.,Ranga lleddy District}

¶99

5 Smt.Neha Rambatla, Wife of Raghavendra^{ltao Baru,} Aged about^{34 years, Occ: Private Employee,} Resident of H.Nq^{13-6-434 I C} /^4, tr,tariltni^Nagar, flehdipatnam^RingRoad' Hyderabad' i ] .,.Respondents /^{Respondents1& 2}

¶100

JOIN M^{EMORANDUM OFCOMPROMISE}

¶101

1 It is humbly; su Snitteci^{that Crl'P No' 10 190 ol 2022 is filed} to quash^{C.C. Ni. 90 1 of 202 1 pending on the file of Hon'ble} XXI MetropJlitqn^{Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad'}

¶102

2 It is^{submittep;' that the Complaint is filed by Defacto} Complainant^{tl:at is 2"a p6spondentherein on the ground} that she^ftg "i^{F,.9i harassecl for additional dowry arld fi'rrther}

¶103

ill-treated^{try hei hustrand in Auckland'New Zealandand} she came b{ck :11^{fiom Nt:u' Zealandand later frled the present} Complaint^{be'fo'ie PS Shamirpet which was takenon file in} FIR No. 509^{of?019 U/ s 49B-A IPC and 3 & 4 of DP Act and} after compl.tiolhl^{of it"""tigation'a Charge Sheet is frled} which is^{takenlonfile in C C' No 901 ol2o2l pending before} Hon'ble^X* ${etroPo^{lolitan Magistrate,Medchalat} Cyberabad. ,

¶104

¶105

¶106

J It is humbl1, submitted that^{Petitioners hereinand Defeacto} Con-rplainant that is 2'd^{Respondent hereinhave amicably} settled the matter out of^{Court and entered in to this Joint} Memorandum of Compromise^{CUM MutualConsent Divroce} Settlement dated 14.O2.2023 and 2nd^{Respondent herein} agreed to u,ithdraw^C. C. No.^{9O 1 i} of^2O2 I^{pendingbefore} Hon'ble XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal at Cyberabad. and the 2"d Petitioner herein agreed to withdraw DVC No. 15 of 2O2l pendirig on the.lile of Hon'ble III Junior Civil Judge CUM X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Athivelle, Ranga Reddy District.

¶107

4 It is humbly submitted ttiat 4o- Petitioner herein and 2^d Respondent herein agreed to end their relationship by way of Mutual Consent Divorce to be filed before Family Court, Ranga Reddy and also agreed that both parties should cooperate with each other for the quick disposal of all the cases. It is further agreed that tfre 2nr Respondent will continue to be in ownership and possession of all the immovable property jewellery, -^{movable propert5r, etc.,} procured by her during the subsiStence of her marriage with 4ft Petitioner and the 4th Petitiondr will continui to be in ownership and possession of all immovable and movable properties procured by him during the subsistence of marriage. ,

¶108

.r.}!F

¶109

¶110

5 It is sllbmi.ltedl^{tha tthe parties here inrvill abide ley} Memoranrlurn^{ofnbompromise CUM MutualConsent Divorce} .j,; Settlement^{d ated ''1.4.tt22023and acceptecl to withdraw the} complaint and^{?Eot to pro'eedwith the same'}

¶111

! l'. :(:

¶112

6 It is submitted^{ilr"t a" l;oth sidesare hailsfrom respectable} families and^{further4trr Petitioner and 2"d Respondent are} well-educafefl r,,^',aird , i,^{ao;ng their jobs and due to some} diffeFences tt '' ' -t"i,i^{i" breakup in their relation as suchthe} parties havg ,^{decidedto settle the matteramr<} :ablY and in .t view of the^{understancling the 2"d Respondent came forward} I I'i to settle the^{matteramicably accepting for quashing of C'C'} No. 90 1^of, t b\2t penciing on the file of Hon'ble XXI Metropoli't'arl^{Magistrate,Medchalat C]'berabad'}

¶113

t tt t a 'i f- P ner No I W I 4.hn*",tm^ Ii ! y- Jkn?o'""^l^ Petitioner^{No. 3} i't I'i! il tition No. 4 :.' I Co or Resp ent Coun l0ners il'{,4.

Sudhendra Baru v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhendra Baru 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

N.Peddi Raju Vs The State of Telangana and another

Be-Am Infra Equipments Private Limited and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Be-Am Infra Equipments Private Limited and Another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Velpula Devender Vs The State of Telangana

Indrasen Daida , Indrasena Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Sai Teja or Veda Sai Vs The State of Telangana