Allowed

Durga Prasad and another v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC26 Jun 2023CRLP/8848/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed Criminal Petition and inter-related IA Nos. 2 and 3 seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. Court accepted compromise and directed payment of fees to Sainik Welfare and High Court Advocates Association before quashing CC No. 3807 of 2022.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in C.C.No. 3807 of 2022 quashed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- to Director, Sainik Welfare and Rs. 5,000/- to Telangana High Court Advocates Association.

Durga Prasad and another Vs The State of Telangana and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132541

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

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

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

l.A.Nos.2 and 3 ot 2022

¶7

IN/AND

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION No: 8848 OF 2022

¶9

Between:

¶10

Durga Prasad, s/o Suryanarayana Shastry, Aged 30^years, occ. Pujari

¶11

Smt. Dhamayanthi, w/o Suryanarayana, aged 50^years, occ. Housewife

¶12

Both are r/o Vijayawada, Krishna District A.P.

¶13

No.2 is bed+idden as such rep by her GPA Holder Durga .Prasad i.e., petitioner No.1 herein

¶14

...Petitioner/Accused No.1 and 2

¶15

AND

¶16

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Women Police Station, DD, Hyderabad rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶17

Smt. Venkata Lakshmi Padma, w/o Durga Prasad, Aged about 23^years, occ. Housewife, r/o MIG-25, HUDA Colony, Santoshnagar Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad.

¶18

...Respondents/Complainant

¶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^proceedings in C.C.No.3807 of 2Q22 on the^{file of the} Xlll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶20

l.A. NO: 1OF 2022

¶21

Petition under Section 482 ol CI.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the^{High Court may} be pleased to^grant stay of all further^{proceedingsincluding the appearanceof} the petitioners C.C.No.3807 ol 2022 on the file of the^{Xlll Addl. Chief}

¶22

Metropolitan [Vlagistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶23

l.A.Nos:2&3o1 2022

¶24

Between:

¶25

Smt. Venkata Lakshmi Padma, w/o Durga Prasad, Aged about 23 years, occ. Housewife, r/o MIG-25, HUDA Colony, Santoshnagar Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad

¶26

...Petitioner/Respondent No.2

¶27

AND

¶28

Durga Prasad, s/o Suryanarayana Shastry, Aged 30 years, occ. Pujari

¶29

Smt. Dhamayanthi, w/o Suryanarayana, aged 50 years, occ. Housewife

¶30

Both are r/o Vijayawada, Krishna District A.P.

¶31

No.2 is bed-ridden as such rep. by her GPA Holder Durga Prasad i.e., petitioner No.1 herein

¶32

... Res pondents/Petitioners

¶33

t'he State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Women Police Station, DD, Hyderabad rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶34

...RespondenURespondent No.1

¶35

Petition under Section 320 (6) of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner herein to compound the offences U/Sec. 498A of IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of D.P. Act and quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 3807 of 2022 on the file of the Xlll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, ln the interest of justice.

¶36

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2022

¶37

Petition under Section 320 (2) 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 record the compromise and to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 3807 of 2022 on the fire of the xil Addl. chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, in the interest of justice.

¶38

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the^{argumentsof Sri B. ANIL} KUMAR YADAV, Advocate for the Petitioners in^{Criminal Petition and} Respondents No.1 & 2 in l.A.Nos.2 & 3 of 2022^{and the} Sri^{S. GANESH,} Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in Criminal Petition and Respondent No.3 in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2O22 and of Sri P. ANITHA, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in Criminal Petition and Petitioner in l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022.

¶39

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶40

I I

¶41

¶42

HON'BLE SMT.^{JUSTICEG. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY}

¶43

I.A.NOs.2 AND 3 of 2022 IN/AND CRIMINAL^{PETITION No.8848 of 2022}

¶44

coMMON ORDER:

¶45

It is submitted bv^{lcarned counselfor the petitioner} and respondent^{No.2 that during pendency of the present} Criminal Petition,^{the parties have compromisedthe matter} and accordingly,^{I.A.Nos.2and 3 of 2022 have been filed to} record the compromise^{bt:tri'eenthem and to compound the} offences.

¶46

Vide orcler dated^I 3.06-2023^{in I'A.Nos.2 and 3 of} 2022, tl-tis Court direclecl^{the partiesalong with their} respective counsel to^{appL'ar before the Secretary, High} Court Legal Services^{Committee, HighCourtFor The State} of Telangana, Hyderabad,^{for identificationand to submit a} report.

¶47

Pursuant to the abovc said direction^{issuedby this} Court, the Secretarl', High Court^{Legal ServicesCommittee,} has identifie<l the parties and submitted a report^dated 22.06.2023 and the same is placed on record.

rt...]

,,./.-:.

In view of the above, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2022 are a-llowed. Consequently, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.38O7 of 2Ol7 on the file of the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, against the petitioners/A-1 and A-2 are hereby quashed subject to their paying an arirount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad (Savings A/c. No. 52 1 8 a92627 9, State Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch (2OO7O), IFSC Code: SBINOO2OO7O, MICR No.5OO004O57) and Rs.5,0OO/-

¶53

'(Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two weeks from today and file proof of the same before the Registry.

¶54

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stald closed

¶55

//TRUE COPY//

¶56

Sd/- B. CHANDRA PRAKASH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR t;p

¶57

secrior.r oFFrcER

¶58

To,

¶59

The Xlll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶60

The Station House Officer, Women Police Station, CCS,DD Potice Station, Hyderabad City Diskict.

¶61

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT)

¶62

One CC to SRI B ANIL KUMAR YADAV, Advocate IOPUC]

¶63

¶64

One CC to SRI P ANITHA, Advocate [OPUC]

¶65

Two CD Copies

¶66

(Along with a Copy of Memo of Compromise)

¶67

Note: Amount of Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees Five thousand only ) has been paid by Sri B. ANIL KUMAR YADAV, Counsel for the Petitioner as directed by the Hon'ble Court order dated:26-06-2023 to the " Director, Saink Welfare Hyderabad , and filed Memo vide proof of compliance USR No.65972 of 2023 dated:1 9-07-2023.

¶68

Note: Amount of Rs. 5,000/- ( Rupees Five thousand only ) has been paid by Sri B. ANIL KUMAR YADAV, Counsel for the Petitioner as directed by the Horl'ble Court order dated:26-06-2023 to the^" Telangana High Court Advocates' Association, Hyderabad, and filed Memo vide proof of compliance USR No.65972 of 2023 dated:19-07-2023

kam

1 \

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:2610612023

COMMON ORDER

l.A.Nos.2 &3 ot 2022

IN/AND

CRLP.No.8848 ot 2022

:-d 1 rts t4
4' (
I
e
{i 11 AUTI ?W J,
:,
",
a.
'-,'. ir- r:-

¶80

THE CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED

¶81

q
\r1
"(
D
ouq

¶82

{ I

¶83

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶84

Crl.P.No. of 2022

¶85

against

¶86

C.C..No. 3807 of 2022

¶87

(on the file of XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad)

¶88

Between:

¶89

1. Durga Prasad s/o Suryanarayana Shastry, Aged 30 years, occ: Pujari,

¶90

1. Smt. Dhamayanthi w/o Suryanarayana, aged

¶91

50 years, occ: Housewife

¶92

Both are r/o Vijayawada, Krishna Distiict

¶93

A.P.

¶94

No.2 is bed-ridden as such rep. by her GPA Holder Durga Prasad i.e., petitioner No.1 herein Pe)lt 6ners/Accused

¶95

No.1 and 2

¶96

and

¶97

1. The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Women Police Station, DD, Hyderabad

¶98

rep. by its Public Prosecutor,

¶99

' High Couft, Hyderabad.

¶100

Smt. Venkata Lakshmi Padma w/o Durga Prasad Aged about 23 years, occ: Housewife, / rlo MIG-25, HUDA Colony, Santoshnagar / Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad. ..Respondents/Complainant

¶101

JOINT MEMO FILED BY THE PETMONERS AND RES. NO.2

¶102

It is submitted that basing on the complaint given by the 2nd respondent, the Women Police, Hyderabad. District, registered a case in FIR No. 345 of 202L on 20-4-2021 for the offence U/Sec. 498-4 of Lp.C. and Sec. 3 and 4 of D.P.Act. Later the police filed charge sheet bearing C.C.No. 3807 of 2022 on the file of the XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad. During the pendenry of the said

¶103

¶104

case/ at the intervention oF elders and well-wishers, the matter has been amicably settled and the petitioner No.1 and the 2nd respondent have agreed to live separately and to th;t r:ffect the parties have exchanged their articles and the 2nd rcspondent has agreed to withdraw the above said criminal case unconditionally. In view of the said settlement, no purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings C.C.No. 3807 of 2022 on the file of the XIII Adrjt. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶105

¶106

In view of the above it is prayed that tfris Hon,ble Court may be pleased to record the compromise and cluash thb proceedings in C.C.No. 3807 of 2022 on the file of the XIII Adcit. Chief Metropolitan Magtstrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, in the interest c j. justice

¶107

. g's}--' COUNSEL FOR PETMONERS

¶108

0 COUN SEL FOR RES.NO.2^N---

¶109

o F"d.
PETITIONERS
J/
O':*r=$

¶110

RESPONDENT NO.2

Durga Prasad and another v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durga Prasad and another v. The State of Telangana and another

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

Chakilam Jayaprakash and 3 others Vs The State of Telangana and another

Sri. Bokka Srikanth Reddy and Another Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Toom Venkateswara Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and another

Kumbarthi Venkateswarulu Vs The State of Telangana

Thungapati Bhaskar Vs The State of Telangana

K. Anjaneyulu Vs The State of Telangana and another