Allowed

M. Venkata Rachita Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC26 Nov 2024CRLP/12201/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the Criminal Petition and allowed interlocutory applications seeking quashing of the FIR. Proceedings against accused in the property dispute FIR were terminated after the parties settled the matter amicably.

What did the court decide?

Allowed IAs 3 and 4 of 2024 and Criminal Petition; Quashed proceedings against petitioners/accused in FIR No. 500 of 2017.

M. Venkata Rachita Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA . AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY. THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF NOVEil/BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

¶5

l.A.Nos.3 and 4 ot 2024

¶6

in/a n d CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12201 OF 2024

¶7

Between :

¶8

'1. M. Venkata Rachita Reddy, Wo. Pruthvi Kumar Reddy, Aged 43 years, R/o. 1-80/40/SP/58-65, Shilpa Homes Layout, Gachibowli, Hyderabad^- 500032

¶9

P. Jagan, S/o. Narayana, Aged 43 years, R/o. 1-80/40/SP/58-65, Shilpa Homes Layout Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500032

¶10

R. Sumith Reddy, S/o R. Dwarakanath Reddy, Aged 53^{years R/o.} 1-80/40/SP/58-65, Shilpa Homes Layout Gachibowli, Hyderabad^- 500032

¶11

-..Petitioner / Accused No. 5, 6 and⁷

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The State of Telangana, through the SHO, P S. Narsingi, Ranga Reddy District, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana

¶14

2 P. Reddi Shekar Reddy, S/o. P, Reddeppa Reddy, Villa No.68, River Edge Villas, Ivlanchirevula, Gandipet, Ranga Reddy, TS 500089

¶15

...Respondents / Complainant

¶16

Petition under Section 528 of the BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may^be pleased to quash the FIR No.500 of 2017 daled 12.07.2017 registered on the file of the Narsingi Police station, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶17

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024

¶18

lnterlocutory Application filed under Section 528 of BNSS^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Petition and accompanying grounds, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings against the petitioners/accused in FIR No.500 of 2017 dated 12.07.20'17 registered on the file of Narsingi Police Station, Ranga Reddy District.

¶19

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2024

¶20

Between :

¶21

P Reddi Shekar Reddy,'S/o. P. Reddeppa Reddy,^{Villa No. 68, RiverEdge} Villas, trilanch irevula, Gandipet, Ranga Reddy,^{TS 500089}

¶22

..Petitioner / Respondent No. 2 / Defacto^Complainant in l.A No.3 and 4 ot 2024

¶23

AND

¶24

M. Venkata Rachita Reddv, Wo. Pruthvi^{Kumar Reddy, Aged 43 years} ,^R/o. 1-80/40/SP/58-65, Shrlpa Homes Layout, Gachibowli,^{Hyderabad- 500032}

¶25

2.P. Jagan, S/o Narayana, Aged 43^{years,R/o.1-80/40/SP/58-65,Shilpa} Homes Layout Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500032

¶26

R. Sumith Reddy, S/o. R. Dwarakanath^{Reddy,Aged 53 years} -^R/o.'l- B0/40/SP/58-65, Shilpa Homes Layout Gachibowli,^{Hyderabad - 500032}

¶27

...Petitioners / Accused No. 5, 6 and⁷ in l.A No.3 and 4 of 2O24

¶28

The State of Telangana, through the SHO, P.S.^{Narsingi, Ranga Reddy} ^ District, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court^{at Hyderabad for the State} of Telangana

¶29

...Respondent No. 1/ Respondent in l.A No.3 and 4 ot 2O24

¶30

lnterlocutory Application filed under Section 359⁽⁶⁾ of Cr.P.C.^{praying that in} the circumstances stated in theaffidavit filed in^{support of the, High Court may be} pleased to permit to compound the offences against the Respondent No.2 herein/ Petitioner/Accused and quash the FIR No.500 of 2017^{daled 12.07.2017 registered} on the file of the Narsingi Police station, Ranga Reddy^District.

¶31

LA. NO: 4OF 2024

¶32

lnterlocutory Application filed under Section 359^{(2) of} Cr.P.C.^{prayingthat in} the circumstances stated in the affidavit and Joint lt/emo filed^{in supportof, the} High Court may be pleased to record the compromise in^{the aforementioned} criminal petition and consequently^quash the FIR No^{500ot 2017 daled 12.07.2017} registered on the file of the Narsingi Police station,^{RangaReddy District.}

¶33

This Petition and lnterlocutory Applications^{coming on for hearing, upon} perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and^Petitions accompanying affidavits in lnterlocutory Application and upon^hearingthe arguments of Sri TPS Harsha, Advocate for the Petitioners^{and AdditionalPublic}

¶34

Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.^"l and Sri^{Sathvik Makunur, Advocate} for the Respondent No. 2.

¶35

The Court made the following Common Order^:

¶36

ItOYI]t,E SN,I-I" JTISTICE JT'VVADI SRIDEVI

¶37

l.A.Nos..l and I ol' 2024 in/and ('IIIMINAL PETITION No.l220l of 2021

¶38

COMMON OIIDIiR:

¶39

'['his CrirninaI Petition is filed under Section 528 of

¶40

B.N.S.S. b1' the petitioners/accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 to quash the proceedings against them in FIR No.500 of 2017 of Narsingi Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 420, 463, 468, 471, 120b rlw 34 of IPC.

¶41

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as welI as the respondent No.2, that during pender.rcl, clf the present Criminal Petition, the parties have cornpromised the rnatter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2024 have been filed to record the compromise between them and to cornpound the offences.

¶42

(

¶43

Vide order dated 2l .10.2024, this Court directed the parties along with their respective counsel to appear befbre the Secretary. High Courr Legal Serviccs Committee, I{igh Cout

¶44

¶45

for the State ofTelangana, I{yderabad, for identification and to

¶46

submit a report.

¶47

Pursuant to the above said direction issued by this Cour1, the parlies have appeared and the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has identified the parties and submitled a report, dated 06.11.2024 and the same is placed on record.

¶48

In view of the above, I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2024 are allowed. Consequently, this Criminal petition is allbwed and the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 in FIR No.500 of 2017 of Narsingi police Station, Cyberabad, are hereby quashed.

¶49

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶50

closed.

¶51

Sd/- A. SREENIVASA^REDDY ASSISTANT(REGISTRAR / \

/iTRUE COPY/i

SECTION^OFFICER

\ SECTION To, 1. The Station^{HouseOfficer' Narsingi (CYB) Police Station, Cyberabad'} 2.TwoCCstothePublicProsecutor,uigrrCourtforthestateofTelanganaat Hyderabad^(OUT)

¶56

S. One CC to^{Sri TPS Harsha, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶57

One CC to Sri^{SathvikMakunur,Advocate[OPUC]}

¶58

5'TwoCCstothePublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad^(OUT)

¶59

Two CD^CoPies

¶60

svs/va

¶61

Along rvith a^{coP-Y of .lointNlenro)}

¶62

HIGH COURT

¶63

DATED:2611112024

¶64

COMMON ORDER l.A.No.3 and 4 of 2024 ln/and CRLP.No.'12201 ot 2024

¶65

'ilt5 S;-4
o
oo rl
t 0 JAt,l 2025
,!
<br>.ar:a.'.r.ttcl

¶66

ALLOWING THE l.A Nos.3 and 4 of 2024 AND Criminal Petition

¶67

/ft

¶68

MEMORANDUM OF CI{IMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PEfI.TION (UndcrSec. 4g2 of Cr.l,.C)

¶69

IN THE IIIGH COURT FOR THE SI'A'I'I| OF TELAN(;ANA A'T IIYDEILABAD

¶70

CIiLP. No

¶71

o1'201.1

¶72

M.Venkata Rachita Reddy

¶73

Wo.-Pruthvi K;;R-;#y. Aged:4j years . ocr) eW:*'---

¶74

wo. I-80/40/S P/58-65, Shilpa Homes Layour Cachibowli, Hyderabad - 50003 2

¶75

2 P. Jagan,

¶76

i/:. I1.1yilt^{Aged: 43 years} r^{s rq: h,!r..er} - Rio. l-80i40lsP/58-65, Shilpa Fiomes Layour Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500032

¶77

R. Sumith Reddy,

¶78

S/o. R. Dwarakanath Reddy, Aged: 5-3 yg215 .6Cq !u.rn{ R/o. I -80/40/SP/5 8-65, Shilpa Ho.e, iavori GachibowU, Hyderabad - 500012

¶79

...PETTf IONER/ACCUSED

¶80

AND

¶81

The State ofTelangana, tkough the

¶82

SHO, P.S. Narsingi, Ranga Reddy District,

¶83

Rep. by the Public^prosecutor, Fligh Court at Hyderabad for the State ofTelangana

¶84

P.Reddi Shekar Reddy , S/o. p. Rcddeppa Reddy, O C( . B.u,l-r-.._ Villa No. 68, River Edge Villas, Manchirevula, Gandipet, Ranga Reddy, TS 500089

¶85

...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINAN"f

¶86

t,
(, l(e\ 1

¶87

Jo IN'I'MEN'IO

¶88

i lr is submittcd^{that on 30.05.2017 , the 2"d respondent has todged a con'rplaintbefore} the l't rcspondent^{statingthat he has purchased some extent ol land in Narsingi} \rillage fronr^{OneMr.K.VSubbareddy ( Accused No'I} '^{who dietl oril4' t I '2020 after} tlre registrtrtion^{of the said FIR) in the yeat 2016by paying valuable sale} consideration.[twasallegedfurtherthatthePetitionershereinalongwithothershave fraudulently^{forged the signaturesof Mr'K'V SubbaReddy and broughtinto} existence^{an unrcgisteredgift deed purportedto havebeen executed by K'V Subba} Reddy in favour^{of M. Goutham Reddy and fuftherdocumenlshave been executed} basecl on^{such gift deed (AccusedNo'5, whodied during thependency of the F-lR)} prior to the^{complainants' purchaseof the same tandin theyear 2016 andrequested} the l't Respondent^{to takeaction against the saidpeople' In viewofthe saidcomplaint} the present^{FIR was registered underSeetions 418'420'463' 471'120b fuw 34 IPC}

¶89

7 It is respectfully^{submitted thatthe accusedNo 1 i'e' late K'V SubbaReddy and} Accused No.5^{Late Goutham Reddy have passed away during the pendencyof the} Ii'lR under^{challenge and all the remaiting parties have settledthe matter amicably} with the intervcntion^{of elders and well-wishers'}

¶90

:) It is humbly^{submitted that in viewofthesettlementthat has beenarrivedat between} the parties,^{the presentjoint memo is beingfiled by the parties to the aboveCriminal} Petition^to bring^{to the Hon'bleCourt notice of such settlement'}

¶91

4 It is fufiher^{submittedthat thereis as suchno monetary considerationinvolvednor} there is an)^{coercion on part ofany ofthelarties in arriving at the settlement'}

¶92

I l,^
?tr> --
*&*t MW

¶93

¶94

useful PurPose^{is likelY}

¶95

It is humbly^{submittedthlt by virtue of said compromtse' no} to be scrved^{by allowinga criminalprosecution to continueand therelorethe parties} are filing^{the prcsenlJoinlMemo of compromise'}

¶96

Place:^I{ Yderabad Date:^.10.2024

¶97

Petitioner^{No.1 /Accused No} 5

¶98

Co*}#"Petitioners

¶99

aP.-

¶100

Petitioner^{No.2 i} No. 6 Petitioner^No-3/Acc No.7

¶101

Rcspond^ctl o.2/ComP^lainant

¶102

Counsel I ndent^No.2

M. Venkata Rachita Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Venkata Rachita 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

Kasula Narasimha Vs Kasula Venkatesh

Mohammed Munwar Zama @ Munawar Zama Vs The State of Telangana

Arun Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Bandarapu Upender, Vs Bandarapu Suvarna

Feroz Khan Vs The State of Telangana

Sri a Ranjith @ Gopu Ranjith Vs The State of Telangana