Allowed

Rajesh Kolhapure v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Jul 2023CRLP/5950/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed criminal petition for quashing proceedings against five accused in SC No. 24 of 2020. Court recorded amicable compromise, confirmed divorce, and discharged accused from charges related to IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act offences.

What did the court decide?

Procedings in SC No. 24 of 2020 were quashed; petitioners discharged from charges under IPC and DP Act; settlement amount confirmed.

Rajesh Kolhapure Vs The State of Telangana — Matrimonial and Divorce | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5950 0F 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

'1. Raje_sh Kolhapure,, S/o. ,Anil. Kolhapure, {Oe at years, Occ.pvt.. Employee, ^^{No 81t1.2,punyadha.m,Wadgaon Sheri, Si. No.SS, FL;e, M";;;;;;H'",} z. savrrna_ Korhapure, wo.Anil Korhapure, Age 52 years, occ.Housewife, R:/o ^^{Yl.1?. Punyadham,Wadgaon Sheri, Sy. NoiSS, pune, trlafrarashi;;. ""'} 3 AnilKolhgpure, S/o Daftaireya Kolhapr-ire, Age 58 yeirs, Occ.prt., Empfov.., Rlo 81t12,^punyadham, Wadgaon Sfreri, Sy."trto.Sg, -3', p;;'", M;il;;";i;5 ",

¶8

1. Sraddha. Ratan, W/o Sachin_hatan, ng; Vrs, Occ.Housewife, Rt/o D_303, Maharashtra.Manali Arcade, Opp.Gargi Complex, Eesides D- fMad, Sata; R;;,-p;r.,

¶9

Shankar Xatare, S/o Gopal Katare, Age Z2 yrs, Occ.Nil, Rt/o 676, New Guruwar Peth,^pune, Mahbrashtra.

¶10

,..PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 to 5

¶11

¶12

1 L1"-9]il::f Tetangana,.req.,^by its pubtic prosecutor, through SHO/St,of pS Mangathat, Hyderabad, High Court at Hvderabad.High Court at Hvderabad.Court at Hvderabad.Hvderabad.

¶13

Mangathat, Hyderabad, High Court at Hvderabad.High Court at Hvderabad.Court at Hvderabad.Hvderabad.

¶14

Suman Kolhapure Suman Chauhan, W6 Rajesh Kolhapure, Age 2g years. ocs. Househotd, Rl/o H.No. 13_1_601t1o, Mairg;thai, fideiior"o, iErir"drit500 006.

¶15

chavan om Prakash s/o Late Kishan Raj Ri/o H.No.13-i -601/10, Mangarhat, Hyderabad, Telangana

¶16

(Bup.OV GPA Holder Chavan Om^prakash as per Court Order dated 26.06.2023 made in t.A.No.1 of 2023 in Crt.p.No_S950 olZOiti"'--

¶17

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS

¶18

Petition under section 4g2 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 and quash the proceedings in sc No. 24 oF 2020 ' (on the file of the court of the rV Addr., Metroporitan Sessions Judge at Nampally, Hyderabad, in pursuance to the charge sheet fired in FrR No. 21s oF 2016, DT.08/'1 1120161 of pS Mangalahat, Hyderabad U/Sec. 4gB_A, 3O7,323, 420,4OG RA/V S. 34 tpc 3, 4 D.p. ACT., Rl/W section i56(3) CrpC). (pRC NO. 28 oF 2018 is renumbered/committed as above on the file of the court of the XVI Addl. chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampily at Hyderabad) initiated against the petitioners / A.1 to 5 herein and also memorandum of compromise, dt.o3/03/2020 in between the petitioners and R-2i complaint herein.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶20

Petition under Section^{482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the l/lemorandum of Grounds^{of criminal Petition,the High court may} be pleased to grant interiri stay^{of all further proceedings in SC No. 24 OF 2020} ' on the file of the court^{of the lV Addl.. l\4etropolitanSessions Judgeat Nampally,} Hyderabad, in^{pursuance to the charge sheet filed in FIR NO. 215 OF 2016'} dt.O}l11t2O16, of PS^{l,4angalahat, Hyderabad including appearance of the} petitioners / A.1 to 5 therein^pending disposal of^{this criminal Petitionin the} interest of^justice.

¶21

coMMoN c. T. lN l.A. NO:^{2&3 OF 2021}

¶22

Between

¶23

1 Suman Kolhapure Suman^{Chauhan, W/o Ralesh Kolhapure, Age 28.Years,} Occ. Househ6ld, R/o H.No.^{'13-1-601/10,Mangalhat, Hyderabad, Telangana-} 500 006.

¶24

2 Chavan Om Prakash S/o^{Late Kishan Raj Fl/o H.No.13-1-601/10'tvlangalhat'} Hyderabad, Telangana (Fieo.bv GPA Hold-er Chavan Om Prakash as per Court Order dated 26.o6.i023 made in l.A.No.1 of 2023 in Crl.P.No.595O^{of 2021} ...PETITIONERYDEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶25

The State of Telangana, rep., by^{its Public Prosecutor,through SHO/Sl'of PS} Mangalhat, Hyderabad, High Court^{at Hyderabad}

¶26

Rajeah Kolhapure, S/o.^{AnilKolhapure,Age 31 Years,Occ.Pvt., Employee,} Rl6P1l12, Prjnyadham, Wadgaon^{Sheri,Sy. No.39, Pune, Maharashtra}

¶27

Savitha Kolhaplre, W/o Anilkolhapure,^{Age 52 Years, Occ.Housewife,Ri/o} B1/'12, Punyadham, Wadgaon Sheri,^{Sy. No.39, Pune, Maharashtra.}

¶28

Anil Kolhapure, S/o Dattaireya Kolhapure,^{Age 58 Years, O99 Pfi.' Employee,} No 81112, Punyadham, Wadgaon Sheri,^{Sy. No.39, Pune, Maharashtra-} - - -

¶29

Sraddha Ratan, W/o Sachin^{Ratan, Age34 Yrs, Occ.Housewife'R/o D-303,} Manali Arcade, Opp.Gargi Complex,^{Besides-D- Mart, Satara Road,Pune,} Maharashtra.

¶30

Shankar Katare, S/o Gopal Katare,^{Age 72 Yrs' Occ.Nil,Fl/o 676,New} Guruwar Peth' Pune' Maharashtra

¶31

...RES'.NDENTS/A¹ To 5

¶32

l.A.No.2 ol 2021

¶33

Petition under Section 320(6) of Cr.P.C^{prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the lVlemorandum of^{Groundsof Criminal Petition,the High Court may} be pleased to permit the Petitioner/ complainant^{andRespondents/A 1-5 tc enter} in to the compromise in SC No. 2412020, on the file of the court of the lV AII/SJ, at Nampaily, Hyderabad, charge sheet filed in FIR NO. 215 OF 2016, DT.08/1 112016 of PS tVlangalahat, Hyderabad, Under Sections 498-4, 307,323, 42O, 4OO R/W S. 34 IPC 3, 4 D.P ACT., R/W section iS6(3) CrpC). Vide pRC

¶34

I i i l I l, i I rl i

¶35

No 28 oF 2018 is renumbered/committed as above on the fire of the court of the xvl Addl. chref rvetroporitan Macgistrate, Nampaily at Hyderabad in the interest of^justice.

¶36

l.A.No.3 of 2 021

¶37

Petition under section 32o (2) Read with 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit and Joint [rrremo of compromise fired therewith, the High court may be preased to record the compromise in terms of the^joint Memo/compromise dt.03/03/2020, in FIR No.21s oF 2016, DT.08_ 112016, of PS Mangalahat, Hyderabad, U/Sec. 498_4, 3O7,323,420, 406 RAff S. 34 IPC 3, 4 D.p. ACT., R/W section 156(3) CrpC), Vide pRC NO.2S OF 2018 is renumbered/committed as above on the fire of the court of the XVr Addr. chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampry at Hyderabad in the interest of justice.

¶38

These Petitions coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and compromise petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Lakshmi Kanth, Advocate for the petitioner in crr.p and Respondent Nos.2 to 6 in r.A.Nos.2 &3 of 2021 and the pubric prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in crr.p and r.A.Nos.2 &3 of 2021 and of sri M'Ramesh, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in crr.p. and petitioner Nos.1&2 in I.A.Nos.2&3 of 2021 .

¶39

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶40

\ \

¶41

¶42

THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICEM'LAXMAN} CRIMINAL PETIT^{IONNo.595O of 2O2L}

¶43

ORDER:

¶44

This Crimrnal^{Petitir rL has been filed toquash the} procecdings against the^pr:titioners /^{accusedNos' 1 to 5 in} S-C.No.24 of 2O2O. on^{tl)e t-ile of the Court of the learned[V} Additional Metropolian^{Sessions Judge atNampally'} Hyderabad.

¶45

It is sta.ted that as^{pe; the directions of this Court dated} 26.06.2023,^{both the pa rtiesappeared beforethe Secretary,} Telangana Iligh Court^{I-c'gal ServicesCommittee and its} report shows that the^{parties were identihedarid entered into} compromise and such^{cot'rLpromisewas without aly coercion'}

¶46

In view of the natur-e^{of offence} 4nd^{compromrseentered} between the^{partics,continuation of the criminalproceedings} against the petitioners /^{i: cr:used Nos.1 to 5 inS'C No'24 of} 2O2O is unwarranted.

¶47

Accordingly, this^{Clriminal Petition isallowed and} proceedings against the petrtioners /^{accusedNos.l to 5in} S.C.No.24 o1' 2O2O on the lile of the Court of the learned IV

¶48

Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge at Nampally, Hyderabad, is hereby quashed. The petrtioners are discharged from the charges under Sections 498-A, 3O7, 323, 42O, 406 read with Section 34 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of Dorvry Prohibition Act, read rvith Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.

¶49

Miscellaneous pe titions pending, if any, shali stand closed

¶50

Sd/-V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// s sEcTtoN oFF|CER

¶51

To,

¶52

'1. The lV Additional t\rletropolitan Sessions Judge at Nampally, Hyderabad 2. The XVt Addirionat Chief Metroptitan Magistrite, N#p;iitl Hia;;;b;" 3. The Station House Officer, tr/arigathat pdtice Siition, i{t;',;*'6;^-"--

¶53

One CC to Sri Lakshmi Kanth ,A--dvocate (OpUCi

¶54

One CC to Sri M.Ramesh , Advocate (OPUC)

¶55

Two CCs to Public^prosecutor, High Cburt of telangana (OUT)

¶56

Two CD Copies

¶57

(along with a copy of Joint Memo )

ks tr

^^,_

HIGH^COURT

DATED:1810712023

ORDER

CRLP.No.5950^{of 2021}

¶64

I
E- 3 l'...{f t^
)'
.l
..-
[ 1 AI'IG ?$I]
,
-i. i-'.'
' :./

¶65

Allowing^{the Crl.P'}

¶66

"N n'
q
'b<br>

¶67

/. t' F*\r I

¶68

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABA, 9o .RTMTNAL PErrroN^No. fuior zozt Against SC No. 24 of 2O2O (On the file of IV Addl., Metropolitan^{Session Judge Hyderabad}

¶69

Between:

¶70

	1.RajeshKolhapure, S/oAnilKolhapure,^{Age31Years, Occ: Pvt., Employ} 2.Smt. Savitha^KolhaPure, W/oAnilKolhapure,^{Age52Years, Occ: Housewife,}	^ee,
	3.AnilKolhapure, S/oDattatreya Kolhapure,^{Age 58Years, Occ:Rrt.,} Employee,^No.1to3^areRloBlI^{1,2,Punyadharn,} WadgaonSheri, Sy.^{No.39, Pune,Maharashtra.}
I lt	4.Mrs. Sraddha Ratan, W/o Sri.Sachin Ratan,^{Age34 Yrs, Occ: Housewife,} R/oD-3O3,Manali^{Arcade,Opp: GargiComplex,} BesidesD- Mart,^{SataraRoad, Pune,Maharashtra,} 5.Shankar Katare,S/o^{Sri. Gopal Katare,} Age72Yrs,^Occ:Nil,^{Rlo676,NewGuruwarPeth,} Pune,Maharashtra.	... Petitioners
j	And
	1.TheStateofTelangana^rep.,bythe Public Prosecutor, High^{CourtatHyderabad.} 2.Smt. Suman Kolhapure@^{Suman Chauhan,} W/o Sri.RajeshKolhapure,^{Age 28Years,} Occ:Household,^{R/oH.No.f3-1-601/IO,} Mangalhat, Hyderabad,^{Telangana-5OO006.}	...Respondents
	D	NO.2
	1.Itisrespectfutly^{submittedthat inview ofmatrimo} 23.08.2016the2"drespondent^{hadfileda private} learnedXVI Addl.,^{Chief MetroPolitan Magistrate,}	^{nialdisputeson} ^{complaintbefore} ^Hyderabadand
	Axafurur .-l- +ob' Jw-r *\ -,-.",g\|

¶71

learned XVI ACMM,^{H1'c1:ra bacl u'as referred said comllaint to Police} Mangalhat,^{Hyderabacl.tlasing on said complaintPoliceMalrgalhat'} Hyderabad has^{got registeied a caseagainstthe petitioners 1 to 5} herein in Crime^{No.215of 2016 dt 08'11'2016for allegedoffences} Under Sections^{498-A, 3O7'323'42O' 406 R/W S 34IPC & Secs 3'} 4 D.P. Act., R/w^{Section 156(3) CrPC)which is no$'sub-iect matterof} SC No. 24^{ol2O2Opendingon the hle of learned IVAddl''} Metropolitan^{Session JudgcH1'derabad'}

¶72

..lt\trrr

¶73

It is submitted^{that during the pendencyof abovesardSC No 24 of} 2020 pending^{on the hle of learned IV Addl} '^{MetropolitanSession} Judge Hyderabad^{with the intervene of elders andwell-wishersof the} petitioners and^{the 2'd respondentand basing on theseriesof the} discussionshadwitheachotheronsubjectmatterandConsequentto understanding^{reached betweenthem' the petitioners and the 2"d} respondent^{have compromisedthe matteramicably under a} Memorandum^{of Compromisedt 03'03 2020'}

¶74

In pursuance^{of amicable compromise'the1st petitionerhad already} paidenterSettlementamountofRs.l2,0o,o00/-{Rupeestwelvelakhs oni, to the^{2"d respondent towards marriageexpenses'permanent}

¶75

-^{alimony andmajntenalceas in the mzrnner mentioner!below:}

¶76

i. Rs.6,oo,ooo=00^{(RupeesSix Lakhsonly)-!y} .way^{of -DD- No'} 534277^{dt.o3.Ol3 zOZOOrawn on State Bank of lndia Pune'}

¶77

Maharashtra^Bralch;and

¶78

ii. Rs-6,00,o00=00^{(Rupees Six l'akhsOnly) ty- way of 'DD- No'} 010293 dt^{l2'O3'2O2lDrawn on Bank of MaharashtraPune} Vadgaonsheri^Branch;

¶79

4.Itissubmittedthatbasingonsaidamicablecompromisethel"t Petitioner^{and 2'd Respondent have lileda mutual consentdivorce} H.M.O.P No.^{37 of 2Q21beforethe Iearned Addl} '^{Family Court'} Metropolitan^{Cnminalcourts at Nampally' Hyderabadand obtained} decree of divorce dt.^{15.03.2027on mutual consent dissolving the}

¶80

qrq+"-k,',-,"* t \ .ri .",..5) w-;)-

¶81

1 I I

¶82

l**j

¶83

marriage dt.18.O6.2O14^between *re^{l"tpetitionerand the 2nd} respondent.

¶84

5 In terms of said amicable^{settlement the 2nd resPorident agreed to} withdraw/ close/compound said^{case SC No 24 of 2020 pendingon} the file of learned IV Addl., Metropolitan^{Session JudgeHyderabad} against the Petitioner Nos. I^{to 5.}

¶85

It is submitted that in^view of^{the amicable compromises of the} issue which are purely matrimonial^{disputes no purpose wouldbe} served in continuing^proceedings in^{said SC No. 24 of 2O2Opending} on the file of learned IV Addl.,^{Metropolitan Session Judge} Hyderabad.

¶86

In view of the above it is^{prayedthat this Hon'bleCourtmay be} pleased to record compromise and^quash the^{proceedingsagainst the} petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 in SC No. 24 of 202O^{pending on the hle of} learned IV Addl., Metropolitan Sessipn Judge Hyderabad^{rn the interest} ofjustice.

¶87

A,r8-
Counsel io-r thi Petitioners
Coun I for spondent No.2

¶88

('
1
&d --1-t "r.,.
2 )r i.1.prBi
3
hp
4
5
Petitioners
(
Respondent No.2
I

Rajesh Kolhapure v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kolhapure 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

Andugula Narsingh Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Kadavath Soni bai Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Kavali Lingamma Vs K. Raghavender Reddy

Peddagani Chandra Shekar, Vs The State of Telangana

Badugula Lingaiah Vs The State of Telangana, And Another

Sushil Kumar Mandal Vs The State of Telangana