Allowed

Jonnalagadda Bhaskar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Sept 2024CRLP/7748/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused Nos. 1 and 2 sought to quash CC proceedings after compromising with the de facto complainant. After identification by the High Court Legal Services Committee, the Court recorded the compromise, permitted compounding, allowed the petition and quashed proceedings, subject to payments of Rs. 5,000 each to two charitable bodies.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.761/2021 against Accused Nos. 1 and 2 quashed on recorded compromise, subject to payment of Rs.5,000 each to Director, Sainik Welfare and Telangana HC Advocates Association.

Jonnalagadda Bhaskar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^336s 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶6

l.A.Nos. 2 AND 3 OF 2024

¶7

IN/AND

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7748 OF 2024

¶9

Between:

¶10

1 Jonnalagadda Bhaskar Reddy, S/o. Ranga Reddy, Aged 46 years, Occ.Self Employee, R/o.'l -79-Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶11

Jonnalagadda Santhosh Reddy, S/o. Ranga Reddy, Aged 34 years, Occ.. Private Job, Ri/o. Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District. Presently at H.No. 1-168/18, Kamaseddi Gudem, Kamathalapally, Nalgonda.

¶12

...Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 & 2

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana, rep. by the public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶15

Jonnalagadda Venkat Reddy, S/o. Gopal Reddy, Aged 46 years, Occ. Agriculture and Ex-Sarpanch R/o.'1-203, Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram ItIandal, Nalgonda District.

¶16

...Respondents

¶17

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 tc quash the entire proceedings in CC No. 76112021 on the file of the Judiciat First Class Magistrate at Nidmanoor against the petitioner No.1 and 2.

¶18

l.A. NO: 1OF 2024

¶19

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in Charge sheet CC No 761/2021 on the frle of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidmanoor agarnst the petitioner No.1 and 2, pending disposal of the above criminal petrtron.

¶20

l.A. Nos: 2OF 2024

¶21

Betvyeen:

¶22

Jonnalagadda Venkat Redd v, S/o. Gopal Reddy, Aged 46 years, Occ. Agriculture and Ex-Sarpanch Rlo.1-2O3, Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶23

... Petitioner/Respondent/De-facto Complainant

¶24

AND

¶25

Jonnalagadda Bhaskar Reddy, S/o. Ranga Reddy, Aged 46 years, Occ.Self Employee, R/o.1-79-Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶26

Jonnalagadda Santhosh Reddy, S/o. Ranga Reddy, Aged 34 years, Occ.. Private Job, R/o. Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District Presently at H.No. 1-168/18, Kamaseddi Gudem, Kamathalapally, Nalgonda.

¶27

...Respondents/Petitioners/Accused No. 1 & 2

¶28

3 The State of Telangana, rep. by the public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶29

... Respo n de nts/C om pla i n a nt

¶30

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 permrt the petitioner/De-facto Complainant to Compound the offence registered against the respondents/ Accused No.1 and 2 in Compromise and quash the proceedings in Charge sheet CC No.76112021 on the fite of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidmanoor for offences under Sec 448,326,504, 506, R^/|/ 34 IPC,

¶31

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2024

¶32

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 permit the petrtioner/De-facto complainant to Record the Compromise accorded between the petitioner/De-facto complaint and Respondents/ Accused No. 1 and 2 and quash proceedings of Charge sheet CC No.76112021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidmanoor.

¶33

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Crrminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri tvlullangi Rami Reddy, Advocate for the Petrtioners and the Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri V- Subhash, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2

¶34

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

: l:

lr i I I i

THE HON'BLE SMT. WSTICE K.^SUJANA

¶39

I.A.Nos.2 atd.3 of 2024

¶40

inland CRIMINAL PETITI ON No.7748 of 2024

¶41

COMMON ORDER:

¶42

It is submitted by learned^{counsel appearing for the} petitioners as well as respondent No.2,^{tJlat during pendency o[} the present Criminal Petition,^{the parties have compromisedthe} matter and accordingly, I.A.Nos.2 ald^{3 of 2024 have beenfiled} to record the compromise between^{them and to compoundthe} offences.

¶43

Vide order dated 29.08.2024,^{this Courtdirected the} parties along with their respective^{counsel to appearbefore the} Secretary, High Court Legal^{ServicesCommittee,High Courtfor} the State of Telangana, Hyderabad,^{for identihcationandto} submit a report.

¶44

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 partiesand submitteda} report, dated 06.09.2024 and^{the same is placedon record'}

¶45

[n view of the above, I.A.Nos.2^{and 3 of 2024 are allowed'} Consequently, this Criminal^{Petition isallowed andthe} proceedings in C.C.No.761 of^{2O2l on the hle o[ Judicial First} Class Magistrate^{at Nidmanoor,against the petitioners/ accused}

¶46

¶47

Nos. I and 2 are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners paying an amount of Rs.S,OOO/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad (Savings A/c.No.52188926279, State Bank of India, Shantinagar Branch (2OO7O], IFSC Code:SBINOO2OO7O, MICR No.50oOO4057) and Rs.S,OOO/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two (O2) weeks from today and file proof of the same before the Registry.

¶48

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶49

Sd/- T. TIRUMALA^DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 1../

/,TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The Judicral Magistrate of First Class,^{at Nidmanoor'} -. 2 The Station House Officer, Tripuraram^{PoliceStation,Nalgonda} - J fne Sectetary, High Court Legal^{ServicesCommittee' High Court for the} State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶54

4 iwo Ccs to tlie Public Prosecutor,^{High Courtfor the Stateof Telangana at} Hyderabad. (OUT)

¶55

5 Ohe CC to Srr Mullangi Rami Reddy,^Advocate [OPUC] o one CC to Sri V. Subhlash, Advocaie [OPUC] 7 Two CD Copies

¶56

\ '!rl

¶57

(ALONG WITH A COPY OF JOINT MEMO^{OF COMPROMISE)}

¶58

Note: Total Amount of Rs.^{'10,0001 ( RupeesTen thousand only} )^{hasbeen paid by} Sri Mullangi Ramr Reddy, Counsel^{for the Petitionersas directedby the Hon'ble} Court vide order dated 10.O9.2024 as Rs. 5,000/-^{( Rupees Five thousand only} )^to the^"Director, Sainik Welfare Hyderabad, and^Rs. 5,000/-^{( Rupees Frve thousand} only ) to th,) Telangana High Court Advocates^{Association, Hyderabad and filed} Memo as proof of compliance USR No.^{90883 of 2024dated 20 09 2024} \x

¶59

HIGH COURT

¶60

DATED:1010912024

¶61

a
, isj',l--}:<br>1. ,
, E rjili 2!?4
1
/','-
1 :
+

¶62

COMMON ORDER

¶63

l.A.Nos.2&3ot2024 ln/and CRLP.No.7748 ot 2024

¶64

ALLOWING BOTH THE I.A'S & CRIMINAL PETITION

¶65

<br>

¶66

)

¶67

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

CRLP No.

oF 2024

Between:^-

Jonnalagadda Bhaskar Reddy , S/o. Ranga Reddy, Aged 46 years/ Occ.: Self Employee, R/o. Konbthalapally Village of Tripuraiam Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶72

Jonnalagadda Santhosh Reddy, S/o. Ranga Reddy, Aged 34 years, Occ.: Private lob,

¶73

Vo.^{Konathalapally} Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶74

Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 1 & 2.

¶75

And

¶76

1 The State of Telangana rep. by the public^prosecutor High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad,

¶77

Jonnalagadda Venkat Reddy , S/o. Gopat Reddy, Aged 46 years, Occ: Agriculture& Ex-Sarpanch R/o. Konathalapally Village of Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶78

..... Respondents

¶79

JOINT MEMO

¶80

It is respectfully submit that The^petitioners and defacto Complainant have settled the dispute amicably at the intervention of elders and well wishers, and tlre matter has been compromised between them without putting any conditions hence the both parties are come to compromise the proceedings in Charge sheet CC No. 76L/2O2t on the file of the Hon'ble ludicial Frrst Ctass Magistrate at Nidmanoor for offences under Sec 448, 326, 504,

¶81

)

¶82

,/ ,^nJ.._ t._1",1 1^ekY)

,122

506,R/w 34^IPC. and^{record the compr.omiseand quash the}

¶87

¶88

proceedings in the a_bove charge^{sheet and the parties have no} 1i.i . i:

¶89

claims or rights against^{tititn otnerin the futJfe'}

¶90

COUNS FOR PE tTIoNrdgtl$.)

¶91

/b^V*s"-g-"t-_ /PEnTIONER/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT

¶92

1
2

¶93

COU GfTafrsPoNDENy'er,er. 1oyla,-

¶94

RESPONDENT NO.1^{& 2.}

¶95

Jonnalagadda Bhaskar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jonnalagadda Bhaskar 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

Varikuppala Jangaiah Vs State of Telangana

Naba Krishna Dutta Vs The State of Telangana

Prasadam Raghu Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Sadguru properties Vs The State of Telangana

Gaddampally Rajeshwar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Maragani Saidulu Vs The State of Telangana