High Court allowed criminal petition to quash proceedings under Section 376 IPC. Court noted parties subsequently married with a child and upheld compromise despite initial suggestion by public prosecutor.
Criminal proceedings in P.R.C. No. 312 of 2020 against petitioners accused Nos. 1 to 3 are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3251 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO IHOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
/' CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8115 OF 2022
Between:
AND
Petition under Section 482 o't 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 PRC No. 312 of 2020 XVll Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad against the petitioners.
l.A. NO: 3 OF 2022
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstanr.es stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased record compromise and to permit the petitioner to compromise with the petitioner/accused in PRC No.312 of 2022 on the file of XVll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad and quash.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2022
Petition under. Section 482 of Cr.P.Cpraying thatin the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the HighCourt may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioners in PRC No.312 of 2O22 on the file of XVll Addl. Chief [Vletropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, pending disposal of the abovequash petition,
l.A. NO: 2OF 2022
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 permit the petitioner/2nd respondent to compound the offence with the respondents in PRC No.312 of 2022 on the file of XVll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SRINATH ATMAKUR, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri N. Prabhakar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. ,,'
The Court made the following: ORDER
C.l.Petition No.811S ol 2022
L
I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8115 OF 2022
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, L973 (for short'Cr.P.C.) by the petitioners - Accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.312 of 2020 pending on the file of )O/II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 376, 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
Crl.Petition No.8115 of 2022
2
in the absence of their family members. After that, 2nd respondent came to know that she was carrying four monthspregnancy, so she requested petitioner - Accused No.1 to marry her. However, Accused No.l refused to marry her. In the said circumstances, the Police filed charge sheet for the aforementioned offences against the petitioners.
t-t
Crl.Petition No.8tL5 ot 2u2z
f
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
SD/.N.CHANDRA SHEKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
sEcrfff OFFICER
To,
1 The XVll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, atHyderabad 2 The Station House Officer, Musheerabadpolice StationHyderabad 2 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Courtfor the Stateof Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT)
4 Ohe CC to SRl. Atmakur Srinath, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies BJLB gsh.
I
I l
I
HIGH COURT
DATED: 2410212023
..:'
.,t..',
!-! s.
ORDER
is"
CRL.P.No.8115 OF 2022 ")
i'rl +
CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED
b,,.)
uXtrl,,
1 issue framed by the court
Whether proceedings under Section 376 IPC can be quashed upon proof of subsequent marriage and compromise between parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Laxmi Narayana Vs State of Madhya PradeshReferred¶38
Laxmi Narayana Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K. Ramesh
K. Adilaxmi
K. Kotaiah
The State of Telangana
Katla Pooja
K. Surender
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
