Allowed

Cheppale Nagarjuna Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Nov 2024CRLP/10526/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quasi-magisterially allowed an application to record a compromise and a petition to compound offences, thereby quashing criminal proceedings initiated under IPC offences and the SC/ST Act following a settlement between the accused and the de facto complainant.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition and compromise applications were allowed; proceedings in S.C.Spl. No. 10 of 2024 were quashed.

Cheppale Nagarjuna Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

¶5

t.A. NOS. 2 AND 3 0F 2024 IN / AND

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10526 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Cheppale Nagarjuna Reddy, S/o. Cheppali Ramasubbareddy, aged 27 years Occ. Assistant Garrison Engineer, t\4ES (tt/lilitary Engineering Services) which is Defence Organization, Kanchanbagh R/o. H No. 4-154, Ivladduri Street, Gulladurthi Village Koilakuntla I\4andal, Kurnool District

¶9

Cheppale Subbaramireddy, S/o. Cheppali Ramasubbareddy, aged 29 years Occ. Civil Contractor, R/o. H No. 4-'154, IVladduri. Street, Gulladurthi Village Koilakuntla lt/andal, Kurnool District

¶10

...Petitioners / Accused No. 1&2

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, through SHO, Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad District Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad

¶13

Ramavath Sudharani, D/o. Ramulu, Aged 27 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. 2- 42, Lingal Village Lingal I\landal, Nagarkurnool District

¶14

...Respondent / Complainant

¶15

Petition under Section 482 o'f Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for records in C.C. No. 26 ol 2024 on the file of the Hon'ble Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad against the Petitioners herein and quash the same.

¶16

I^{prayer amendedas per Court Orderdated28-10-2024 videI.A. No. '1 of 2024} made in Crl.P. No. 10526 of 2023 l

¶17

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2023

¶18

Petition under Section 482 o'f Cr.P .C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitron, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in C.C. No. 26 of 2024 on lhe file of the

¶19

Hon'ble Vl Additional ttletropolitan Sessions^{Judge, Secunderabad includingthe} arrest of the Petitioners / Accused No. 1^{and 2, pendingdisposal of the above} Criminal Petition.

¶20

I^{prayer amendedas per Court Order dated 28-10-2024vide l.A. No. 1 of 2024} made in Crl.P. No. 10526 ot 2023 |

¶21

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024

¶22

Petition under Section 359⁽⁶⁾ rlw⁵²⁸ of^{BNSS praying that in the} circumstances stated in the Memorandum^{of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High} Court may be^pleased to^permit the^{Petitioners and the Respondent to compound} the offence in view of the compromise between^{the partiesand therefore quash the} proceedings in FIR No.'166 of 2023 on the file SHO, PS Kanchanbagh^andthe resultant Charge Sheet vide SC/SPL^No.1 0 of^{2024 on the file of Hon'ble Vl} Additional Metropolitan Session Judge,^{Secunderabad against the petitioners} herein.

¶23

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2024

¶24

Petition under Section 359 (2) rlw 528 of^{BNSS praying that in the} circumstances stated in the Memorandum of^{Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High} Court may be pleased to compound the offences^{quashthe proceedingsin FIR} No.166 of 2023 on the file SHO, PS Kanchanbagh and the resultant^{Charge Sheet} vide SC/SPL No.1 0 of 2024 on the file of Hon'ble Vl Additional^Metropolitan Session Judge, Secunderabad against the Petitioners herein.

¶25

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the^{argumentsof Sri N Naveen} Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Additional Public^Prosecutor Qn^behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri Yajur Putta, Advocate for the^{RespondentNo.} z.

¶26

The Court made the following Common Order :

i'!,1 I il

!!i i:,i

\ I

, l

H ON' IJLIj SN{.I.. J U S'I.ICIi J U VVADI SI{IDI],VI

¶32

LA.Nos.2 and3 of 2024 in/nnd CRIMINAL PETITION No.I0526 of 2023

¶33

COMMON ORDER:

¶34

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 to^quash the proceedings against them in S.C.Spl.No.l0 of 2024 pending on the file of VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 354, 376, 417, 420, 506 and 509 of IPC and Sections 3(l)(s), 3(t)(w) and 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.

¶35

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the 2nd respondent, that during pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2024 have been filed to record the compromise between them and to compound the offences.

¶36

\ t

¶37

Vide order dated 28.10.2024, this Court directed the parties along with their respective counsel to appear before the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court

!r i a ii li

for the State ofTelangana, Hyderabad, for identification^{and to} submit a report.

¶43

Pursuant to the above said direction issued by^this Court, the parties have appeared and the Secretary, High Court^Legal Services Committee, has identified^{the parties and submitteda} report, dated 30. 10.2024 and the same is^{placedon record.}

¶44

In view of the above, I.A.Nos.2 and 3^{of 2024are} allowed. Consequently, this Criminal^{Petition is allowedand} the proceedings against the^{petitioners/accused Nos. I and 2 in} S.C.Spl.No.10 of 2024^{pending on the file of VI Metropolitan}

¶45

Sessions Judge, Secunderabad,^{are hereby quashed.}

¶46

Miscellaneous applications, if^{any pending,shallstand}

¶47

closed. Sd/- MOHD. ISMAIL //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT FEGISTRAR ) SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To,

¶49

1 . The VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad

¶50

The Vll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad

¶51

The Station House Officer, Kanchanbagh pS, Hyderabad District 4. Two CCs to the public p -rosecutor' High Court for the State of Telangana,

¶52

Hva"irt""o fo[f1"""'

¶53

One CC to Sri N Naveen Kumar, Advocate [OpUC]

¶54

One CC to Sri yajur putta Advocate tOpUCl

¶55

7 . Two CD Copies

¶56

Along with a copy of Joint Memo of Compromise

vNsh fu

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 11112024

COMMON ORDER

ltiE ni i5
7
I J t\r- il
I
} ,I
t 3, ogJANzozs Pl2i)
l'+ i,y'
P/irC'r r_r' l-
it

¶64

l.A. Nos. 2 and 3 of 2024

¶65

in / and

¶66

CRLP.No.10526 of 2024

¶67

ALLOWING THE CRLP AND

¶68

I.A. Nos. 2 and 3 of 2024

¶69

¶70

¶71

IN THE COURT Otr TH[, HON'BLE IIIGII COURT OF JUDICATURE IOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA, AT HYDERABAD

¶72

I.A.NO. OF 2024 IN

¶73

cRr.P. NO. {A8Ai} OF 2023 lopt

¶74

BETWEEN:

¶75

Cheppale Nagarjuna Reddy

¶76

S/o. Cheppali Ramasubbareddy, Aged: 27 years. Occ: Assistant Garrison Engineer, MES (Military Engineering Services) which is

¶77

Defence Organizatiotr, Kanchanbagh R/o. H.No. 4-154, Madduri Street, Gulladurthi Village Koilakuntla Mandal, Kumool District.

¶78

Cheppale Subbaram ir.eddy

¶79

Sio, Cheppali Ramasubbareddy, Aged: 29 years,

¶80

Occ. Civil Contractor,

¶81

R/o. LI No. 4-154, Madduri Street, Gulladurthi Village Koilakuntla Mandal, Kurnool District

¶82

. Petitioners /Accused

¶83

AND

¶84

The State ofTelangana

¶85

Through SHO, Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad District Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court ofTelangana at Hyderabadd

¶86

XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

¶87

. . Respondents JOINT MEMO

¶88

It is submitted ttrat the above Criminal Petition has been fiied praying their Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in FIR No.166 of 2023 on the file of SHO, Police Station, Kanchanbagh against the Petitioners and to pass such Other Order or Orders that this Hon'ble Court may be deemed frt and proper in the circumstance ofthe case. a J 0l R E'it{ql'; C

¶89

¶90

The above impugned crime arose in view of the complaint dated 02.10.2023 being lodged, the Respondent^{No.2/De-facto} Complainant on^{the file} of^the I(anchanbagh Police Stalion for the offences^punishable under^{sectiqns 354,} 376,417,42Q,5Q6,509 of Indian Penal Code,^{1860 and} Under^{Sectign 3 (1)} (S),3(1) (w) and 3(2) (va) ofthe SC/ST Act against the Petltioners^6erein.

¶91

That subsequent to the registration of FIR. a charge .h""t ,id.ffiffbloof 2024 has been filed on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional Metrgpolitan^Session Judge, Secunderabad. That in view of the frling of the^said chargesheet,^the Petitioner herein have filed an amendment Petition vide I.A.No. of²⁰²⁴ it CRLP.No. 10520 o12023.

¶92

It is submitted that while the present criminal petition is^pending before this Hon'ble Court, the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2/ De-Facto Complainant with a view to put quietus to the disputes arnpng them, have mutualty agreed to resolve the disputes between themselves by way of an amicahle settletnent

¶93

It is submitted that as the matter was pending adjudicatien before this Hon'ble Court hoLh the Paflies i.e., the Petitioner and Respondent No.2/De-facto Complainant has revisited the entire circumstances as on the date of the lodging of the comp)aint which resulted in the initiation of tfie impugned criminal proceedings and both the Parties were able to come to a definite resoluiion that both the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 lDe- facto complainant shall come to an amicable settlement, wlerein it was.agreed tha{ the Respondent No.2 lDe-facto Complirinant shall withdraw the complaint that '

¶94

led to initiation of criminal proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused as the said complaint was lodged in a haste and that the Respondent No.2 herein had

¶95

ftY,^{(' S"4L^{9'""'}

¶96

Z G

¶97

no intention to allege any of the serious and heinous^allegations against the Petitioners herein. .

¶98

That though the Respondent No.2 and the Petitioner herein were. in acquaintance,. there was u iu"k of cardinal. understanding and^approach between . each other and that the same had resulted into qrave misunderstanding which resulted in the filing of the impugned complaint^by the Responderit No.2.

¶99

It is further submitted that pending disposal of the^{present Criminal Petition,} both the parties i.e., the Petitioners and the Respondent No. 2^after understanding the existing circumstances with an. intent to move^on independently and to further give a quietus to the entire realm of^issues between them it is decided amongst the parties more^{particularlythe} Respondent No.2 to amicably settle the disputes amongst themselves.

¶100

In view of the same, the Respondent No.2/ De-facto Complainant^{is intending} to withdraw the complaint dt.02.10.2023 lodged by her which resulted in registration of the impugned FIR vide FIR No.i66 of 2023 on the file of Kanchanbagh P.S. and subsequent filing of the chargesheet uid"SffiH of 2024 on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional Metropolitan Session^Judge,

¶101

Secunderabad and as such the Petitioners and the Respondent 2^hereinseek indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to exercise itsjurisdiction under Section⁵²⁸ of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and^quash the^proceedings in

¶102

Crime No. 166 ol 2023 on the file of Kanchanbagh P.S. add the^resultant sc,sPiq lO

¶103

chargesheet vide 6@Ehfu of 2024 on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional

¶104

Mehopolitan Session Judge, Secunderabad against the Petitioners herein^as compounded a^J

¶105

a^J

¶106

l\l'R. .(,,.til^q fl-e;

¶107

(.,,

¶108

It is respectfully submitted^{that, the} Petitioner^{and the RespondentNo. 2/ De-} facto Complainant have both agrqed to settle. the disputes among the^parties inter se and, that they shall not raise 4ny further dispules in furtherance of^the proceedings in Crime No. 166 of 2023 on the frle of Kanchanbagh P.S. and that the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 have agreed to amiciily settfe the disputes between themselves and that for the same reason, the both the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2/De-facto Complainant have agreed to withdraw all any allegations made against each other unconditionally. That all the disputes between the parties stands finally resolved and theie is no ill will or complaint against each other in any manner.

¶109

¶110

It is further submitted that the paflies with their mutual csnsent and free will without any pressure, force, coercion or undue influence from any side, have agreed to end all their disputes fully and move on independently to live peace lully.

¶111

1 1. It is submitted that, in light of the same, it is pertinent to submit that the Respondent No.2/ De-facto Complainant is voluntarily without any kind of pressure or coercion willing to withdraw all the charges alleged by her against the Petitioners herein and further does not want to proceed wilh the criminal proceedings against the Petitioner herein.

¶112

Since the Respondent No. 2lDe-facto Complainant is willing to withdraw the allegations against the Petitioner/ Accused, in view of the compromise, all the further proceedings in Crime No. 166 of 2023 on the file of Kanchanbagh P.S Scaflmlle

¶113

and tlre chargesheet vide Cftlr}'fit4 of 2024 has been filed on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional Metropolitan Session Judge, Secunderabad are liable to be quashed to meet the ends ofjustice ?.:ail

¶114

?.:ail - \ au-v^c}t

¶115

D^r R' s-alq &";

¶116

It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in Crime No. 166 of 2023 on the file of Kanchanbagh Poiice Station and the consequential Charge sheet vide ffiour 2024 on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional Mehopolitan Session Judge, Secunderabad agahst the Petitioners and pass such other order- or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper ip the circumstances of the case.

¶117

Pctitioner /Accused I <- 1. Cheppale Reddy

¶118

Dy {.S*dl-sbt; De facto Complainant

¶119

XLYX

¶120

CS^vYSL 2. Cheppale Subbaramiredd

¶121

COUNSEL R PF]TITIONERS

¶122

COUNSEL F RE,SPONDENTS

Cheppale Nagarjuna Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cheppale Nagarjuna Reddy 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

Nomula RajenderGoud Vs The State of Telangana

Gurram Balakrishna Vs The State of Telangana

Mandapalli Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Suresh Agarwal Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. v.Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana

Chintala Varaha Prasad Vs The State of Telangana