Allowed

Atikam Preethi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Sept 2023CRLP/6079/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed Criminal Petition 6079 of 2019 and associated IA Nos. 1 to 3 of 2023 proposing to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner based on a miscellaneous criminal compromise report and subsequent affidavit confirming settlement.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in S.S.C. No. 95 of 2018 were quashed. Petitioner/Accused was directed to pay Rs. 10,000 to Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad, within ten days and file proof.

Atikam Preethi Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2023)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶5

WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER . TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYTHREE

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶7

CRIIT/IINAL PETITION NO: 6079 0F 2019

¶8

ALo NG WITH I.A. NOS. 1TO 30F 2023

¶9

l.A. NOS. 1 TO 3 oF 2023

¶10

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2o23

¶11

Between:

¶12

9aokka.^{Kamalamma,Wo.Prabhakar,Aged about 50 years,} Occ. Tailor, Fyo.D.No.2_ 119,.K^{C Colony, Bheemaram,fi g ggnpa4ly,[tanOa[nanbmkonOilWarLns;i'--} District. .. Petitiorier / 2'nd Respondent I Compiiinani "-'

¶13

And

¶14

.^{1. AtikamPreethi,- D/o,pg!.g G,ogd,} Aged about 29 years, Occ. Software Engineer, R/o.H.No.1-306, Srindggi Qorony, eneehrrri,.'r,- nr."ipirtny Mandat, Hanamkonda, Warangat"District.'' _ R;$";J"nU'iEiiiiJirurl Accused

¶15

The State of Telangana, Bep. Oy its public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Tetangana At Hydeiabdd.

¶16

Petition under section 320 of cr.p.c. Rr/w. sec. 492 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be preased to permit the petitioners herein to compound the offences under Section 323, 506 tpC.and Section 3 (i) (r) (s) (z) ST/SC (pOA) Act, 2015. against Accused which is the subject matter of s.S.c.No.9s of 201g on the file of the court of ll Addl. District Sessions Judge-cum- Spl. Sessions Judge for SC/ST Cases at Warangal, and quash the proceedings therein.

l.A. NO: 2 &3OF 2023

Between:

Bokka Prabhakar S/o. llaiah aged^{about57 years,Occ: Watchman,R/o.D.No.2-179} K C Co ro nv' B hee^{ma ra m' HEffi} ffi 5ilJ*T:3lJ::illtl3;;HTi inT''''u'o Complainant in both l.A.Nos^{2 and 3 ol 2O23}

¶21

And

¶22

Atikam Preethi, D/o.Babu^{Goud, Aged about29 years, Occ.Software} Engineer, R/o.H.No.1-306,^{Srinagar Colony, Bheemaram, Hasanparthy} Mandat, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. .. RespondenU Petitioner i Accused

¶23

The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Courtfor the} State of Telangana^{At HYderabad.}

¶24

Bokka Kamalamma,^{W/o.Prabhakar, Aged about50 years,Occ. Tailor,} Ri/o.D.No.2-1 79, K.C. Colony,^{Bheemaram, HasanparthyMandal,} Hanamkonda, Warangal District. .. Respondent / Defacto Complainant in both l.A.Nos.2^{and 3 ot 2023}

¶25

l.A.No. 2 of 2023

¶26

Petition under Section 320^{(2) F/w. Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the Memorandumof Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High} court may be^{pleased to permit the petitioners herein to compoundthe offences} under Seclion 323, 506 IPC^{and Section3 (i) (r) (s) (z) ST/SC (POA) Act' 2015'} against Accused^{which is the subject matter of s.s.c.No.95of 2018 on the file of} the court of vll Addl. District^{sessions Judge-cum- spl. sessions Judge for sc/ST} Cases at Warangal,^{and quashthe proceedingstherein.}

¶27

I.A. NO: 3 OF 2023

¶28

Petition under Section 320^{of Cr.P.C.Rl/w.Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C. prayingthat} in the circumstances stated in^{the Mbmorandumof Grounds of criminal} Petition,the High court^{may be pleasedto recordthe terms of compromiseand} quash the proceedings in S.s.c.No.95 of^2O1B on^{the file of the courtof Vll Addl.} District Sessions Judge-cum- spl.^{sessions Judge for sc/STCases at Warangal,} for the offences under Section^{323, 506 IPC and Section 3 (i) (r) (s) (z) ST/SC} (POA) Act, 2015. against Accused and to^{pass such otherorder or ordersas this} Hon'ble Court may deem fit and^{proper in the interestof justice.}

¶29

¶30

Crl.Petition 6079ot20 19

¶31

Between:

¶32

Ati_kam Preethi, D/o.Babu.Goud, Aged about 29 years, Occ. Software Engineer, Ft/o.t{.No.'1-306, Srinagai Colony, Bheemaram, Hasanparthy Mandal, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. ..;PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶33

1 . The.State of lelangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, .High Court for the

¶34

Bokka Kamalamma, Wo.Prabhakar, Aged about 50 years, Occ. Tailor, Rl/o. D.No.2-179, K.C. Colony, Bheemaram, Hasanparthy Mandal, Hanamkonda, Warangal District.

¶35

Bokka Prabhakar S/o. llaiah aged about 57 years, Occ: Watchman, R/o. D.No. 2-179 K.C.Colony, Bheemaram, Hasanparthy Mandal, Hanamkonda, Warangal District.

¶36

( R -! impleaded as per Court Order dated 26-06-2023 in l.A.No. 4 of 2023 in Crl.P.No. 6079 of 201 9 ) ...RESPoNDENT/COMPLAINANTS

¶37

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the M6morandum of Grounds of Criminal-Peiition, the High Court may be pleased to call,for: the'records relating to S.S.C.N0.95 OF 2018 on the file Court of Vlt Addl. District SesSions Judge-cum- Spl. Sessions Judge for SC/ST Cases at WArangal and quagh.the proceedings in S.S,C.No.95 ol 2018 .

¶38

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2019

¶39

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 petitioner in S.S.C.N0.95 OF 2018 on the file Court of Vll Addl. District Sessions Judge-cumSpl. Sessions Judge for SC/ST Cases at Warangal, pending the disposal of the Crl. Petition.

¶40

l.A. NO: 1OF 2022

¶41

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 extend the interim order dated 25.O9.2019 passed in Crl.P.No.6079 of 2019 until further orders, in the interest of justice.

¶42

l.A. O:, 1OF 2020

¶43

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 extend the interim order dated 25.9.2079 passed in Crl.P.No.6079 of 2019 on the file of this Hon'ble Court .

¶44

This Petition coming on for^{hearing,upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A'} PRABHAKAR RAO ,Advocate^{for the Petitionerin crl.Petition and Respondent} No. 1 in LA.Nos.^,1 to 3^{and the PublicProsecutorOn behalf of the Respondent} No.1 in Crl.Petition and Respondent^{No.2 in l.A.Nos. 1 to 3 of 2023and of sri} Avinash singh Advocate for^{the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 in crl.Petitionand} Petitioner in l.A.Nos. 2 and^{3 ol 2023.}

¶45

The Court made the following^COMMONORDER

¶46

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶47

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6 o79 0F 2019 ALONG WtTH LA.NOS.I TO 3 OF 2()23

¶48

.COMMON ORDER

¶49

This Crirninal Pe'tition is'filed dnder Settion 482 Cr.p.C., to quash the proceedings in S.S.C.No.9S of 2018 pending on the file of VII Additional District Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Judge for SC/ST Cases at Warangal. The petitioner is accused in the said case. The offences alleged against the petitioner herein is punishable under Sections 323, 29O,506 of Indian Penai Code and Section 3(1) {r) (s) (z} SC/ST {pOA) Act, 2015.

¶50

Heard le.arned 6ounsel appearing on both sides and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. perused the record.

¶51

During the pendency of the present Criminal petition, the parties have compromised the matter and, accordingly, the parties have filed I.A.Nos.1 to 3 of 2023 to permit to compound the offences and to compromise the case.

¶52

r'5

¶53

¶54

Vide order dated 05.O9.2023, tinis Court, after recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the pefitioners as well as respondent No.2, directed the parties to appear before . the Secretar5z, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, for their identification and also directed the Secretary to submit a report by 2O.O9.2O23. In compliarrce with the said order, the secretary has submitted his report, on 13.O9.2023.

¶55

In the report of the Secretary, Telangana l-Iigh Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, it is stated that in obedience of the orders dated 05.09.2023, the petitioner and the 2nd respondent have appeared before him along with their counsel and on examination and verification of their particulars from their Aadhar Cards, they were tallied. Thus the identification of both the parties has been established.

¶56

The 2.a respondent herein has filed an zrfficlavit stating that at the intervention of both side elders, they have settled the disputes between them amicably and a Memorandum of Understanding was also executed and the 2.d respondent has no objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners

¶57

¶58

¶59

herein in the above case. The said affidavit and the report of the Secretary are placed on record.

¶60

7.' In view the.said repoit qf thb Secretary; Telangana High Court Legal Serviceq Commlttee, IJyd.erabad and dlsg in view of the compromise entered between the petitioners and respondent No.2, I.A.Nos.1 to 3 of 2023 are allowed. Consequently, the Criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in S.S.C.No.9S of 2O l8 pending ori the hle of VII Additional District Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Judge for SC/ST Cases at Warangal, are hereby quashed against the petitionery'Accused. Petitioner/Accused has undertaken to pay an amount of Rs.1O,OOO/ fRupee.s fen Thousand Only) to..The Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad (Savings A/c.No.5218 8926279, State Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch (2OO7O, IFSC Code :SBINOO2OO7O, MICR No.5OOOO4O57), within a period of ten days from today, and lile proof of the sarne into the Registry.

I rl l:

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶65

¶66

//TRUE COPYII

¶67

Sd/- MOHD. ISMAIL. ASSISTryT REGISTRAd se8Pon oFFrcER

¶68

ions J u d ge c u m spec ia I Sessio ns J udse

¶69

: i+U#3*"":"i,",1?:Hf;ss

¶70

' I,:?"tt3:iB.House^{officer", iiakativaUniversitv potice Station,} t""""utor' Hish court ror the state or reransana at

¶71

i li:ifr"":itd,f{!;

¶72

OneCCro SRtelpRaAHeXeRRAO, Advocate [opuc]

¶73

One CC to Sri Avinash Singh , Advocate (OpUC)

¶74

MU Two CD Copies ' ( along with a copy of Memorandum of Compromise)

¶75

Note: Amount of Rs. 10,000i_ ( Rupees Ten thousand only ) has been paid by Sri A' Prabhakar Rao, counser for the petitioner as directed by the Hon,bre court vide order dated 20-09-2023 to the "Director, sainik werfare Hyderabad, and fired Memo as proof ofcompliance USR No.111585 of2)23dated 10_08_2023

HIGH COURT

KSJ

DATED:20109/2023

COMMON ORDER

CRLP.No.6079 of 2019 ALONG WITH I.A. Nos. I ro 3 of 2023

¶82

1 HE SI.q
(
e
5 (n(
Ll I '. ;il; i ti. .t z
* -s/
t)FSpr *r1C-'!rl/
-:tz

¶83

ALLOWING THE CRL.PETITION

¶84

NN /2

¶85

MEMORANDUM^{OF INTERIM APPLICATION}

¶86

FILED UNDER'SECIION^{320 OF CR.P.C, r/w' Section 482 of Cr'F} .C:, -_ TTTETT COURTFORTHE'STATE^{OFTEI.'AGANAAT HYDERABAD}

¶87

oF 2023
I.A,NO.
IN
Crl.PeUtion No. 6079 Of,2019

¶88

Between: .':
Bokka Prabhakar^S/oIlaiah Agedabout⁵⁷Years,^{Occ:Watchman,} R/o.D.No.2-179,^K'C.ColonY, Bheemaram,^{HasanParthYMandal,} Hanamkonda,^{Warangal District} Petjtioner/3d^resPondenV Husbandof^{theComPlainant}
And:
l.AtikamPreethi,^{D/o.BabuGoud,} Agedabout^{29years, Occ: SoftwareEngineer,} Uo.H.No.1-306,^{SrinagarColonY,} Bheemaram,^{HasanParthYMandal,} il;;k";J;,^{warangatbittiJ} RespondenqPetitioner/Accused
..RespondenVSlate 2.The^{statFofTelangana,} Rep.by its^{Public Prosecutor;} HighCourt^{for theState of Telangana} AtHyderabad.
...Respondent/Defacto^complainant 3.Bokka^Kamalamma,Wo.Prabhakar, Agedabout⁵⁰Years,^{Occ: Tailor,} R/o.D.No.2-179,^{K.C. ColonY,} Bheemaram,^{HasanParthYMandal,} Hanamkonda,^{WarangalDistrict"'}

¶89

]OINT MEMO

¶90

I submit^{that on the report submitted by the peutioners/De-fac'to} complainants,^{a case in CrimeNo'174 of 2OL7 under Section323' 506 IPC and} Section 3⁽ⁱ⁾ G)^{(s) (z) S[/SC(POA) Act, 2015' The police after investigation} filedChargesheetintheabovecrimebeforethecourtofVllAddl.District SessionsJudgerum-Spl.SessionsJudgeforSC/STCasesatWarangalagainst thepetiUonerandthesmewasnumberedasS.5'C.No'95of2018.

¶91

¶92

¶93

I submit that during the pendenry of the S.S,C.No.95 of 2018 on tne dte of the court of VII Addt. District Sessions Judge_cum_ Spt. SJ;;ril,il; \ SC/ST Cases at Warangal, the disputes between the petitioner / de_facto complainant and 3'd respondent and accused were set ed amicabry ", ;; intervention otthe elders and well wishers of both sides.

¶94

3' I submit that the petiuoner and 3'd respondent has no interq* to prosecute the case s's'c.No.g' 0f 201g having regard to fact that the disputes were settled amicably. The petitioner and 3d respondent n., ;; objection for the closure of the case against the Accused in s.s.c.*o.ss o'f 2018 on the file oF the court of VIi Addl. District Sessions ,*r"r l;,. Sessions Judge for SC/ST Cases at Warangal,

¶95

It is therefore prayed that this Honre court may be preased to recgrd the terms of compromise and quash the proceedings in S,s.c.No.g' of 201g on the fire of the court of vII Addr. District Sessions Judge-cum- spl. sessions:uole for sc/sr cases at Warangar, for the offences under Section 323, 506 ;a ri!: Section 3 (i) (r) (s) (z) Sr/sC (poA) A*, 2015. against o.:*";;;; ; #! ,1 the interest such other order or ofjustice. orders as this Hon,ble cou.t ruy "";;;.;;,;;;Jr#

¶96

Bokka Prabhakar 3d respon nt

¶97

Counsel for the 3d respondent

¶98

,')
*-
Atika
,li-

¶99

Counsel for the

¶100

Hyderabad Date:

Atikam Preethi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atikam Preethi 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

Uma Maheshwari Challa , Pendyala Vs State of Telangana

Rudraraju Ramakrishnam Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Thunga Malleshwari Vs The State of Telangana

Mr N S Sree Ramulu and Another Vs State of Telangana, Rep by P.P and Another

Staney Robert Berlin Vs the State of a.P., and Another

Ravindra Mohan, Nizamabad Dist. Vs E Sumana, Hyd and 3 Othrs