A criminal petition to quash proceedings under FIR No.235 of 2014 was allowed after the parties compromised. I.As.2 and 3 seeking recording of the compromise were permitted; the High Court Legal Services Committee verified the parties. The Court quashed the FIR proceedings against accused nos.1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 subject to payment of costs.
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.
[338s I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K.SUJANA
l.A NOs.2 AND 3 OF 2024 IN/AND
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5080 OF 2024
Between:
...Petitioner/Al lA2lA4tAslAG & A7
AND
...Respondent
..Defacto ComplainanUR-2
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P .Cpraying thatin the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to quash the impugned proceedings in FIR No.235 of 2014 ofP.S
WPSDD, HYD on the file of the Xlll Additional C.M.M at Hyderabad against the Petitioners/Accused, in the interest of justice.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024
AND
The State of Telangana, Represented through Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad.
...Respondent in l.A Nos.2 and 3 of 2O24
Petition under Section 32O (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 perfiit to record the compromise in F.l.R.No.235 o,t 2014 of P.S. WPSDD, HYD, on the file of the Xllt Additional C.M.M.at Hyderabad registered aEainst the Respondent /Accused in the interest of justice.
l.A. NO: 3 OF 2024
Petition under Section 320 (6) 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 in F.l_R.No.235 of 2014 of P.S.WpSDD, HyD, on the file of the Xlll Additional C.M.M at Hyderabad registered against the Respondent/Accused in the interest of justice.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri p.Rana Kamalasan, Advocate for the Petitioners and Assistant public prosecutor on
behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Sri E.Vimal Kumar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K.SUJANA
I.A.Nos.2 andl3 of 2o24 !4144d CRIMINAL PETITION No.5O8O of2024
COMMON ORDER:
It is submitted by learned counselappearing for the petitioners as well as the respondent No.2, thatduring pendency of tl.e present Criminal Petition, theparties have compromised the matter and accordingly,I.A.Nos-2 and 3 of 2024 have been irled to record the compromisebetween them and to compound the offences.
)
2 s(s, J Crl P.tL sOaO oa 2O2a
a
Magistrate, at Hyderabad against the petitioners/accused Nos. l, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners paying an amount of Rs.2,OOO/_ (Rupees Two Thousand Only) to the Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad (Savings A/c.No.S2188926229, Stare Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch (2OOZO, IFSC Code:SBINOO2OO7O, MICR No.5OOO04O57) and Rs.2,OOO/_ (Rupees Two Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two (02) weeks from today and hle proof of the same before the Registry.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
Sd/. T. TIRUMALADEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
ll,
SECTION OFFICER
To,
Sv s/gh
Along with a copy ofJointMemo of Compromise
Note:TotalAmountofRs.4'000!(RupeesFourthousandonly)hasbeenpaidby sri P.Rana Kamalasan,counsel for the Petitioner as directedby the Hon',blecourt vide order dated 07.08.2024as Rs.2,0001 (RupeesTwothousandonly) to the "Director,SainikWelfareHyderabad,andRs'2,000!(RupeesTwothousandonly)to theTelanganaHighCourtAdvocatesAssociation,HyderabadandfiledMemoas proof of compliance USR No.88846of 2024, dated13-09-2024'
YV
HIGH COURT
DATED:0710812024
\ H€ STA le.
( (*. <br>+
{
o,) ,ii
2 2 c[T zut
vu ,y
/
SspA i'-'.t -.,r,
t-)2./
,{r.
COMMON ORDER r.A NO.2 AND 3 0F 2024 IN/AND CRLP.No.5080 of 2024
ALLOWING THE CRLP AND I.A NO.2 AND 3 OF 2024
q.o6"A Yy_ -,dt
MEMORANDTJM OF CRIMINAL PETITION
(Filed u/s.482 of Cr.P. C)
IN TI{E HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDI]RABAD
I.A. No. of 2024 IN
CRL.P.No. 5080 OF 2024 AGAINST
F.I.RNo. 235of 2014 of P.S WPSDD, FfYD
(On the f,rle of the Flon'ble )CII Addl C.M.M at Hyderabad)
Between:
l. Raju Chawan, S/o. Nagender RaoCharr.'an, Aged about : 41 years, Occ: Business, IVo. H.No. 13-3-506, Block No-S, MCH Colony, Jiyaguda, Hyderabad.
MCH Colony, Jiyaguda, Hyderabad.
MCH Colony, Jiyaguda, Hyderabad.
The de-facto complainant will also withdraw the case hled for maintenance U/Sec. 125 Cr.P.C claiming maintenance which u,as ordered by the Hon'ble Family Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad to pay a maintenance to the de-facto complainant and her minor son, as the Petitioners/accused is paying a lump sum amount for the same. The de-facto complainant has even agreed to withdraw the FIR No. 235 of 2014 dated2l.07.2014 filed U/sec. 494-4 IPC & rlw 34 of IPC, r/1 156 (3) Cr.P.C.
4 It is submitted that both the 1"t partygnd the 2'd party agreed that they vrill cooperate for mutual consent divorce on receiving an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/(Rupees two lakh only).
8- It is submitted that in rerm of receiving amount agreed by 1.,party, she shafl not claim any permanent alimony ofherserfor her son as amount paid and agreed is total perrnanent alimony present and fufure and shall not claim of any nature.
9 It is submitted that the 1" pu.ry shall withdraw DVC No. 263 of 2015 on the file of Hon'ble fV MM court, Hyderabad on receiving an arnount of Rs. 50,000/_ - (Rtpees Fifty Thousand onry) on u ""pu.ut".."ipt of acknowredging the receipt of amount shall be issued by the I'r party and further both l$ and 2.d parties sha fire Mutual consent Divorce o.p before Hon'bre Famiry court at Hyderabad and the z c>. <>t l'\A cdfrff .(
balance amount ol Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees Onc Lakh and fifty thousand only) shall be paid to the l"t party on the date ofpassing final decree of mutual consent divorce before Hon'ble Family Court, Hyderabad
withdrawn, cancelled and revoked finally after signing of this mutual comprbmise dccd
15- It is submitted that the 2nd RespondenuDe-facto complainant keeping the interest of the family members of the petitioner/Accused in mind has voluntarily decided to compromise the casc. Further both the petitioner/Accused and the 2nd Respondent/De-facto complainant are rn small professrons and in order to live happily hereafter both parties have deciried to compromise the case.
17 - It is submitted that the petitioner./Accused and the znd Respondent/de-facto complainant are private employees ad are engaged in different vocations to meet their day to day requirements of their lamrly members and the bontinuation of the criminal proceedings is coming in-their way of living a peacctul life.
{
It is therefore prayed that both parties, i.e. the petitioner/Aciused and the 2nd Respondent/ De facto complainant, pray that this Hori'ble court riray be pleased to compound the offences in FIR No. 235ot 2014, filed on 21.07 -zol4 filed u/Sec. 494-4 of IPC &rlw 34 of IPC, r/t 156 (3) Cr.p.C of p.S WpSDD, HyD on the file of the Hon'ble XIll Addl c.M.M at Hyderabad, in the inrerest ofjustice and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and necessary in the circumstances of the
case and in the interest ofjustice.
Y\ry''- \6hY@ Ury
.( .c lY O*lxn
Raiu Chawan (Petitioner/Accusedp"!
wn $tu-trs
,t d<br>(_ () 6)
Rajini Chawan 2nd Respondent/De facto.Complainant)
v
$-
el for Petitioner Counsel for 2nd Respondent
Date: 07.06.2O24
Place: Hyderabad
t
il
{' ,"
r'Y
i
,{t-
lit
t
I
FTYDERABAD DISTRICT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD
I.A. No. OF 2022 IN CRL.P.No. 5080 OF 2024
_J
.7
JOINT CO},IPROMISE MEMO
i.i. i tEE : r--
i .., t-r 'a-': _ iii?.{l;:i*'qiU"E {ih
. i:igh Coi;rl', ,:i;.-.i:l;:r::'r: .X H-,-'delabad'
i io: i:1, :i:at:a; t Tel:lr::ana
I
, ti.l eiveti ori:
:i::r.
i.riat:fai ir:r;.::i.
6-2024
elerk
5to9
.
Advocate
Counsel for 2"d RespondenL{De facto Complainant.
4-p
1 issue framed by the court
Can the FIR No.235/2014 proceedings be quashed on the basis of a verified compromise between the petitioners and the de facto complainant?
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Raju Chawan
Nagender Rao Chawan
Smt. Sandhya @ K Anitha
Smt. Jyothi
Ravi Chawan
Shilpa Pawar
K.Sujana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
