Allowed

Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Jun 2023CRLP/3715/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed petitions for quashing C.C. No.22 of 2022 upon recording of compromise. Court directed accused to pay specified amounts to Director Sainik Welfare and Advocates Association and remain acquitted pending payment.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C. No.22 of 2022 quashed contingent upon payment of Rs.10,000 to Director Sainik Welfare and Rs.5,000 to HC Advocates Association.

Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

.I i I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

|.A.NOS.2 AND 3 0F 2023

¶7

IN/AND

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3715 OF 2023

¶9

COMMON CT's lN l.ANos. 2 AND 3 OF 2023lN CRIMINAL PETITION

¶10

Between:

¶11

Sri-Kiran Kumar Samanta, S/o. Rama Chandra Samanta, Aged 33 years, Occ.Private Employee, Ryo. H.No.13-6818111N35, Om Prakash Building, Ambedkar Nagar, Bapughat, Langar House, Hyderabad and N/o Majhigam, PO.Padmapur, City.Brahrnpur, Ganjam District.

¶12

...Petitioner/Respondent No.2

¶13

AND

¶14

i^1. Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar, (Wrongly mentioned the surname as Gachihikar) S/o. Purna Chandra Gochhikar, Aged 26 years, Occ. Private Job, Rl/o. Ambedkar Nagar Colony, Near Saibaba Temple, Langourhouse, Bhapughat, Hyderabad and N/o Manikarnika Sahi, Street Village, Puri Mandal and District, Odissa State-752001.

¶15

2 Mr. Palash Pal, (Wrongly mentioned as Pal Palash) S/o. Ashok Kumar Pal, Aged 31 years, Occ.Pvt Job, Rr/o. 1-611111145, 1st Floor, Plot No.101.,/ Siddiq Nagar, Gachibowli, Serilingamprally, Ranga Reddy District-500032, Telangana and N/o Wakuda Village and lvlandal and District, West Bengal State.

¶16

3 Mr.Prashant Bhushan, (Wrongly shown as Bushan Prashanth) S/o. Nutan Prasad (wrongly shown as Bolaprasad), Aged 34 years, Occ.Pvt Employee, Rl/o.H.No.19-84, Flat No.402, DAC Vertex APTS, PJR Layour, Road No.7, Madhavpuri Hills, Chandnagar, Ranga Reddy District-500050. Telangana and N/o Quarter No.21 1 1 Sector-68 Bokaro, Jharkand State.

¶17

4 Ir4s-Anitha Biswas, D/o. Ajit Kumar Biswas and Wo Palash Pal, Aged 34 years, Occ.Pvt Job(Steel Company at Hi-Tech City), R/o 27-1-715, Old DPIV Office, Kakatiya lvlerit School, Bhimavaram, West Godavari, A.P.-534201 , Presently Rl/o. H 101 , Chitrapuri Hills, Gachibowly, J-lydderabad.

¶18

5 Mrs.Nishi, D/o. Nishant Bhushan and Wo. Nishan, Aged 36 years, Occ.Pvt Job, R/o. Flat No.402, DAC Vertex Apt, Road No.7, PJR Enclave, Madhavapuri Chandanagar, Ranga Reddy District-s00050 Telananga and N/o of G.T.Road, Aligadh, Uttar Pradesh.

¶19

... Respondents/Petitioners

¶20

6 The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court building, Hyderabad Through Police Station lvladhapur (Guttala), Cyberabad.

¶21

...Respondent/Respondent No.1

¶22

l.A. NO: 2OF 2023

¶23

Petition under Section 320 (6) Read with 482 of Cr.P C praying that in the circumstances stated in the [Vemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner/Respondent No.2-defacto complainant to compound the offences with the respondents/petitioners under Section 420,406, 506 of IPC and Section 3,4,5 and 6 of Prize lvloney Circulation Schemes Banning Act, 1978 in the interest of justice.

¶24

l.A. NO: 3OF 2023

¶25

Petition under Section 320 (2) Read with 482 of Cr.P C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit and Joint [Vlemo of Compromise filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased lo record the terms of compromise and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.22 of 2022 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief lvletropolitan [,4agistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, agCinst the petitioners in the interest of^justice.

¶26

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3715 OF 20230

¶27

Between:

¶28

Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar, (Wrongly mentioned the surname as Gachihikar) S/o. Purna Chandra Gochhikar, Aged 26 years, Occ- Private Job, R/o. Ambedkar Nagar Colony, Near Saibaba Temple, Langourhouse, Bhapughat, Hyderabad and N/o lvlanikarnika Sahi, Street Village, Puri tulandal

¶29

, and Diskict, Odissa State-752001.

¶30

Mr. Palash Pal, (Wrongly mentroned as Pal Palash) S/o. Ashok Kumar Pal, Aged 31 years, Occ.Pvt Job, Rl/o. 1-611111145, 1st Floor, Plot No.101.,/ Siddiq Nagar, Gachibowli, Serilingamprally, Ranga Reddy Dishict-500032, Telangana and N/o Wakuda Village and Mandal and District, West Bengal State.

¶31

Mr.Prashant Bhushan, (Wrongly shown as Bushan Prashanth) S/o. Nutan Prasad (wrongly shown as Bolaprasad), Aged 34 years, Occ.Pvt Employee, Rl/o.H.No.19-84, Flat No.402, DAC Vertex APTS, PJR Layour, Road No.7, Ivladhavpuri Hills, Chandnagar, Ranga Reddy Diskict-500050. Telangana and N/o Quarter No.21^'1 1 Sector-6B Bokaro, Jharkand State.

¶32

Ms.Anitha Biswas, D/o. Ajit Kumar Biswas and Wo Palash Pal, Aged 34 years, Occ.Pvt Job(Steel Company at Hi-Tech City), R/o 27-1-715, Old DPM Office, Kakatiya Merit School, Bhimavaram, West Godavari , A.P.-534201 , Presently R/o. H^'101 , Chitrapuri Hills, Gachibowly, Hydderabad.

¶33

Mrs.Nishi, D/o Nishanl Bhushan and Wo. Nishan, Aged 36 years, Occ_pvt Job, Rl/o. Flat No.402, DAC Vertex Apt, Road^-No.7, PJR Enclave,

¶34

Madhalapuri Chandanagar,Ranga Reddy District-500050 Telananga and N/o of G.T.Road, Aligadh, Uttar Pradesh

¶35

...Petitioner/Accused Nos.3 to 7

¶36

AND

¶37

The State of Telanganai Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court building, Hyderabad Through Police Station Madhapur (Guttala), e yberabad.

¶38

2 Sri.Kiran Kumar Samanta, S/o. Rama Chandra Samanta, Aged 33 years, Occ. Private Employee, R/rc. H. No. 1 3-681 8/1 /A/35, Om Prak-ash Building, Amb_edkar Nagar, Bapughat, Langar House, Hyderabad and N/o lvlajhigam, PO.Padmapur, City.Brahrnpur, Ganjam Districi.

¶39

...Respondents/Defacto-Complainant

¶40

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 proceedings in C.C. No.22 of 2022 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief lr4etropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar against the Petitioners/Accused No.3 to 7.

¶41

LA. NO: 1 oF 2023

¶42

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances , staled in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in C.C.No.22 of 2022 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief lvletropolitan tvlagistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, including personal appearance of the petitioners/A3-7 pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶43

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lrrlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C. Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners in Criminal Petition and Respondent Nos.1 to 5 in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023 and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in Criminal Petition and Respondent No.2 in l_A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023 and ol Sri Suresh Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in Criminal Petition and Petitioner in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023.

¶44

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶45

I \

¶46

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶47

I.A.NOS.2 AND 3 0F 2023 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITION No.37l5 OF 2023

¶48

COMMON ORDER:

¶49

It is submitted by learned counsel for the^{petitionersand} responctent No.2 that during lhe^pendency of^{the present Criminal} Petition, the parties have compromised^{the matter and, accordingly,} respondent No.2 filed I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023^{to permit to compound} the offerrces and to compromise the case.

¶50

Vide order dated t7 .O4.2023, this Court,^{directed the parties to} appear belore the Secre tary, Telangana^{HighCour: Legal Sen'ices} Committee, Hyderahacl, along rtith their respective^{c ortnselior therr'} identification and for recordtng the conrprornise^{e,nteredbetrveen} them.

¶51

¶52

Basing on the said drrcctioti, the Secretary^{l.egaiSenrices} Comrrittee has identificd the parties and^{recordedlhe compt-orlise.} The joint merno of compromise and the^report of^{the Secretaryare} placed on record.

¶53

In view of the above, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023^{are allowed} Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C. No.22 of 2022 pendrng on the file of learned. I Additional Senror Civil Judge-cum.Chiel M e tropolitar-r Magistrate, Ranga ReJcly

. ,.arn

District, against petitioners-Accused Nos.3 to Z are hereby quashed subject to petitioners paying an amount of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to The Director, Sainik Welfarc, Hyderabad (Savings A/c.No.52188 926279, State Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch (2OO7O), IFSC Code :SBIN0020O7O, MICR No.5O0004057) and Rs.5,00o/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the 'Telangana Fligh Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad', within a period of two weeks from today, and fi1e proof of the same into the Registry.

¶58

As a sequel, the miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, sha1l

¶59

stand closed

¶60

Sd/- A.V.S. PRASAD //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRARaT ,t SECTION OFFICER 1. The I Additional Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chref^{Metropolitan lvlagistrate,} Ranga Reddy District at L.B.^Nagar. 2_ The Station House Officer:, Madhapur^{Police Station, Cyberabad District.}

¶61

To,

¶62

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor,^{High Court for the State of Telangana,} at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶63

The Director, Sainik Welfare,^Hyderabad.

¶64

One CC to Sri C. Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶65

One CC to Sri Suresh Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶66

Two CD Copies

¶67

(Along with a copy of the Joint Memo) MMK

¶68

¶69

Cost Memo:

¶70

Note : Amount paid by Sri C. Kumar^{Counselfor the Petitioner towards} imposed by cost of Rs. 10,000/-^{( Rupees Ten Thousand only} )^datedin favour of Director Sainik Welfare^{Hyderabad ( SavingA,/c. No. 52188926279} , State^{Bank of lndia,ShantinagarBranch& 20070, IFSC Code:} S81N0020070,M1GRNo.500004057)

¶71

Note: Amount of Rs. 5,000/-⁽ Rupees^{Five thousand only} )^{has been paid} by Sri C.Kumar, Counsel for the^{Petitioqer as directed by the Hon'ble} Cburt order daledl2-O6-2023 to the^{Telangana AdvocatesAssociation} Hyderabad , and filed Memo^{vide proof of complianceUSR No.50391} of 2023 dated 14-06-2023

f:-i^li

HIGH COURT

GAC, J

DATED:1210612023

COMMON ORDER

LA.Nos.2 and 3 of²⁰²³ lni

¶78

CRLP.No.3715 of²⁰²³

¶79

f. l rlE ST4 r..a
i)
<br>oo) ! 2 AUB 204 ..,::
L
* l)c:P , *.''liQ
/,.'
'_a:=:::-

¶80

ALLOWING THE l.A.Nos.2^{AND 3 OF 2023 AND} ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL^PETITION

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶85

CRLP No. OF 2023

¶86

Between:

¶87

Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar (Wrongly mentioned' The surname as Gachihikar) S/o Purna Chandra Gochhikar Agd 26 years, Occ:hrt. Job, R/o Ambedkar Nagar Colony, Near Saibaba Temple, Langourhouse, Bhapughat Hyderabad and N/o Manikarnika Sahi, Street Village, Puri Mandal and Distict, Odissa State-752001.

¶88

)

¶89

Mr. Palash Pal (Wrongly mentioned as"Pal PalashJ S/o Ashok Kumar Pal, Aged 31 years, Occ:Art Job, No^{L-6IlUtL45, Id Floor, Plot No.101,} Siddiq Nagar, Gachibowli, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District-500032, Telangana and N/o Wakuda Village and Mandal-and District, West Bengal State.

¶90

It'lr.Prashant Bhushan (Wrongly shown as'tsushan PrashanthJ S/o Nutan Prasad (wrongly sholvn as "Bolaprasad'), Aged 34 years, OccM Employee, Vo^{H.No.19-84, Flat No.402,DAC} Vertex^APTS, PJR Layour, Road No.7, Madhavpuri Hills, Chandnagar, Ranga Reddy Disfid-500050. Telangana and N/o Quarter No.2111 Sector-6B Bokaro, Jharkand State. ,L n{"t^, I t ;M) Aal\ ^t,^{'1,]"-t" f "l} Y4","L-J Petitionerfto.1 Petitioner No.2 er 3 t A:^M N I sL I ,,? Petitioner No.4 Petitioner No.5 pondent No.2

¶91

¶92

¶93

Ms.Anitha Biswas^{D/o.AjitKumarBiswas} And Wo^PalashPal, Aged 34^{years, Occ:Pvt Job(Steel Companyat Hi-Tech City),}

¶94

Rlo27-L-715, Old^{DPM Office,}

¶95

Kakatiya merit^{school, Bhimavaram,} West Godavari,^A.P.-534201. Presently R/oH#^{101, Chitrapuri Hills,} GachibowlY,^llYdderabad.

¶96

Mrs.Nishi^{D/oNishantBhushan} And Wo Nishan,

¶97

Aged 36 Years, Occ:hrt^Job, ' R/o Flat No.402, DAC Vertex APt, Road No.7, PJR Enclave,^{MadhavapuriHills,} Chandanagar, Ranga^{Reddy District-500050} Telananga and N/o^of G.T.Road, Aligadh,^{Uttar Pradesh.} ..Petitioner/Accused^{Nos.3 to 7}

¶98

And -

¶99

The State of^Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court builciing,^HYderabed Through PS Madhapur^{(Guttala),Cyberabad.}

¶100

Sri.Kiran Kumar Samanta S/o Rama Chandra^Samanta,

¶101

Aged 33 years, Occ:Pvt^EmPloYee,

¶102

R/o H.No.13-68L8lUN35,^{OmPrakashBuilding,} Ambedkar Nagar, BaPughat, Langar House,^{HYderabadandN/o} Majhigam, PO:PadmaPur,

¶103

,w+?wo"'sJ*'',ft Respondents/Defacto-Com Plainant PetltionEr No.i Petitioner No.2 "/"1,YNo.3 r{ is\t )x

¶104

Petitioner No.4 Petitloner No.5 pondent No.2

¶105

¶106

]OINT COMPROMISE MEMO-

¶107

¶108

It is respectfully submifted that the 2d respondent filed complaint against Petitioners/Accused 3-7 and others alleging offences under section 420,406,506 of-IPC and Section 3,4,5, & 6 of^prize Money Circulation Schemes Banning Act, L978 on the file of^pS, Madhapu(GutEla), Cyberabad wherein he alleged that the accused got the amounts deposited ftom him under the false pr:etext and subsequendy the 2d respondent came to know that it is a QNET business and that ifs a chain business. Therefore, he approached the Police Madhapur (Guttala), who in-turn registered the case in FIR.No.4 of 2019 on 03-12-2018 under section 406, 42O IPC and section 3 & 4 of^prize Money Orculation Schemes Banning Act, 1978 and after conducting table invesUgaUon, the police laid-iharge sheet, which has been taken cognizance for the said offences by 1$ Additional Senior Gvil Judge-cumChief Metropolibn Magiifate, Ranga Reddy Diskict at L.B.Nagar and the same is pending for trial.

¶109

While things stood thus, after intervention of the elders and well-wishers of both petitioner and 2d respondent herein, they have setUed their disputes wherein the petitioner has agreed to pay an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- torarards full and final settlement before this Hontle Court, at the time of recording compromise and the 2nd

¶110

responden(defacto-complainant agreed for the same, q-K"L^t Pil(A Petitioner No.1 Petitioner No.2 Petitio No.3 ),* .\ -=> I rt; -'Petitioner No.4 Peutioner No.5 dent No.2

¶111

-T-

¶112

In^{view of the undertakingand paymentof Rs'2,50'000/- by the} petitioners to the 2nd respondent,^{the2nd respondent agreed to withdraw} the complaint^{in C.C.No.22 of 2022pending on the file of 1* Additional} Senior Civil^{Judge-cum-ChiefMetropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy} District at^{L.B.Nagar againstthe petitioners'}

¶113

Henceforth, there^{shall not be any claims whatsoeveragainst the} petitioners and the^{2nd respondent and that theyshallnot interfere with} their individual^{lives in any mannerwhatsoeverin future'}

¶114

The^{2nd respondentshall not file any fresh complainVs' case/s} etc., against^{the petitioners herein in futureconcerningthe same cause} of action.

¶115

It is therefore^{prayed that this HonbleCourt may be pleasedto} ) record the terms^{of compromiseandquash the proceedings in C'C'No'22} of 2022^{pending on the file of 1s Additional Senior Cvil Judge-cum-Chief} Metropolitan Magistrate,^{Ranga Reddy Disti'ictat L'B'Nagar against the} petitioners/Accused^{Nos.3 to 7 in the interest ofjusticeandto pass such} other order^{or orders as this Honble courtmay deem fit and properin}

¶116

the circumstances^{of the case'} r$';ffi"T -'i"flJ T d,"tPetitionAr No.1 Petitioner No.2 Petitioner No.3 .4^rk Ni,L; ndent No.2 Petitioner No.4 p"tifr*, nro.s csD'2 No.2 Counsel for Petitioner '^Counselfor

¶117

Hyderabad Dated: 10-04-2023

Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Madhusudhan Gochhikar 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

Sri NimmagaddaDarahasaLahari Vs The State of Telangana

Dr.M.Radha Rani and Another Vs the State of A.P. and Another

Gaddam Ashok Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Kalumula Naresh Vs The State of Telangana

Nitturi Rajalingu Vs The State of Telangana and another

DumpalaGuruva Reddy Vs The State of Telangana