Arrugatti Shiva Vs The State of Telangana

Ivledapally Shiva Kumar @ Boya Shiva, S/o. Medapaly Ramulu, Age about 25 years, Occ- Private Employee, R/o.H.No.3-5'l , Ajjakollu Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

¶11

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No. 1 and 2

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENT

¶15

Kummari Sirisha, D/o. Kusilanna, Wo. Kurumoothry, Aged about 23 years, Occ- House Wife, R/o.H.No.1-42, Ajlakollu Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

¶16

...RESPONDENT/VICTIM

¶17

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS 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 SC.SPL.N o.24812022 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court for Rape and POCSO Act Case, Wanaparthy.

¶18

l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^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^proceedings in SC.SPL.No.248l2O22 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court for Rape and POCSO Act Case, Wanaparthy pending disposal of the above Crl.P in the interest of Justice.

;#tr;.;{<

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2025

Between:

Kummari Sirisha, D/o. Kusilanna, Wo. Kurumoothry, Aged about 23 years, Occ- House Wife, R/o.H.No.1-42, Ajjakollu Villagr-., Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

¶24

...PETITIONEtURESPONDENT No. 2

¶25

AND

¶26

Arrugatti Shiva, S/o. Late Ramaswamy, Aged about 24 years, Occ- Mechanic, R/o.H.No. 1-96, Alakollu Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wzrnaparthy District.

¶27

.) Medapally Shiva Kumar @ Boya Shiva, S/o. Medapaly Ramulu, Age about 25 years, Occ- Private Employee, R/o.H.No.3-51, Ajjakollu Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

¶28

...RESPONt)ENTS/PETITIONERS

¶29

The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prose:utor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad.

¶30

.,.RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶31

Petition under Section 359(6) 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 parties to compound the offences in SC.SpL.No. 24812022 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court for Rrpe and POCSO Act Case, Wanaparthy in the rnterest of justice.

¶32

l.A. NO: 4 OF 2025

¶33

Petition under Section 359(2) of BNSS praying that n the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the terms of compromise between the parties in SC.SPL.No. 24812022 on the file of the Fast Track Speciat for Rape and pOCSO Act Case, Wanaparthy in the interest of justice.

¶34

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing^.he Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argumen.s of Sri p Nagendra Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioners, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Iirr Lattupally Anand, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.

¶35

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶36

;!i.-

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶38

l.A.Nos.3 and 4 OF 2O25 in/and CRIMINAL PETITION No.8117 OF 2025

¶39

COMMON ORDER

¶40

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of^Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short^'BNSS, 2023'),^seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.SPL.No.248 of 2022 on the file of the Fast Track Special Court^{for Rape and POCSO} Act Cases, Wanaparthy.

¶41

The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in^the S.C.SPL.No.248 ol 2022 registered for the offences^{punishableunder} Sections 366, 376(2Xn) of lndian Penal Code and Section 5(1)r/w^{6 &} Section 16 rlw 17 of Protection of Children From Sexual^{Offences Act,} 2012.

¶42

Heard Mr.P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the^petitioners, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public^Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1-State and Mr.Lattupally^Anand, learned counsel for the respondent^No.2.

¶43

Pending this petition, the^{parties have} entered into the^compromise and, accordingly, they moved l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 with the^{prayer to} permit them to enter into compromise and by recording the settlement^to

¶44

2

¶45

N71

¶46

I.^.1.\0t.3 ard 4 0J 2025 ir/ and Crl.P.No.EI l7 of 2025

¶47

quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accrused Nos.1 and 2 in S.C.SPL.No.24B of 2022.

¶48

This Court vide otder dated 09.07.2025 referrr:d the pa(ies to the High Court l-egal Services Committee for identificati()n and to verify the voluntariness in arriving the settlement. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has submitted report dated 14.07.2025 stating that the parties were identified by their respective counsel and also on verification of Aadhar Cards/ldentity Cards and the enquiries revealed that the parties have willfully and without coercion entered into settlemenVcom promise.

¶49

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the materials on record.

¶50

7 . The accusations against the petitioners/accur;ed Nos.1 and 2 in the Police Report lodged by the respondent No.2/victim girl are that the accused No.'l abducted the victim minor girl with the help of accused No.2 on the pretext of love and sexually exploited her. -laving considered the allegations, the statement in the Joint Affidavit thal the victim girl got married and arrived at the amicable settlement betweer the parties and to restore peace among them, in the light of the dictums in Gian Singh v.

¶51

NrR"/

¶52

3

¶53

IA.Nos.J and 4 0J2025^tn/attd Cr/.P.No.8|17^0J2025

¶54

State of Punjab and anothe/ and Anit^{Mishrav. Sfate of ll.P.zi State} of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan^{and others3, this Court is of the} considered view that^quashment of the^{impugned proceedingsin view of} the settlement by exercising^{jurisdiction under Section482 Cr-P.C-1528of} BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest^{of justice.}

¶55

Accordingly, l.A.Nos.3^{and 4} of^{2025 are allowed.Consequently,} all proceedings in S.C.SPL.No.24B^{ot 2022 on the file of the Fast Track} Special Court for Rape and^{POCSO Act Cases, Wanaparthy,are hereby} quashed against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and^2.

¶56

ln the above terms, the Criminal Petition^{is disposed of'} Pending miscellaneous applications, if any,^{shall stand}

¶57

closed.

¶58

SD/- AHMED ABDULLA KHAN AS ISTANT REGISTRAR ' tott [,o7^{scL 30]} ,- 10ry WgL lS? , u\c (5) sLL 6% //TRUE COPY//

¶59

SECTION OFFICER

¶60

To,

¶61

1 . The Principal District Sessions Judge^{at Wanaparthy}

¶62

The Fast Track Special Court for^{Rape and POCSOAct Case, Wanaparthy}

¶63

The Station House Officer,^{Madanapur Police Station,Wanaparthy}

¶64

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor,^{HighCourt for the State of Telangana at} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶65

One CC to Sri P. Nagendra^{Reddy, Advocate} [OPUCI

¶66

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

¶67

Two CD Copies 6, (Along with a copy of^joint memo of compromise)

VH/gh

HIGH COURT

+

DATED: 0610812025

COMMON ORDER l.A. NO: 3 AND 4 OF 2025 IN/AND CRLP.No.8117 ot 2025

¶73

tsa :; lA
a
i
1ll sEP 206
;.
'),.
.\ * .r^ -r' t.,/ -: -1
:'-' \i ': ._-: a ' t' '' -l:'--l

¶74

lA Nos.3 and 4 ot 2025 ARE ALLOWED

¶75

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶76

\ 0
q

¶77

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TEI,ANGANA AT FIYEERABAD Crl.P.No. of 2025

¶78

BETWEBN: 1).Arrugatti Shiva S/o.Late RamaswamY, Aged about 24years, Occ:^Mechanic, R,/o.H.No. 1 -96, Ajjakollu^Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District 2).Medapally Shiva Kumar^{@ Boya Shiva} S/o.Medapaly Ramulu. Age about 25 years, Occ:^{PrivateEmployee,} R/o. H.No.3-5 I, Ajjakollu^Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District' ... Petitioners/ Accused No. I and 2 AND 1).The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court ofTelangana, At^Hyderabad. ... Respondent 2). Kummari Sirisha D/o. Kusilanna, W/o. Kurumoothry, Aged about 23^years, Occ:^{House Wife,} R/o. H.No. I -.42, Ajj akollu^Village, Maanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy^District. ... Respondent/ De-facto Complainant JOINT MEMO

¶79

The Petitioners are the^Accused No'l^{and 2 in SC'SPL'No'} 248/2022 on the file of the^{Fast Track SpecialCourt for Rape} and POCSO Act Case, Wanaparthy.^{Based on the Complaint} made by the De-facto Complainant,^{the MadanapurPolice} Station registered FIR No.28l2020^{and after completing the}

¶80

I \

¶81

l f{ '#

¶82

in'estiqalion, the police filed the Charge Slreet lbr the offence u/sec'366, 326(2)(n) of Ipc and sec.S(r) r/w.6 & sec. 16 r/w.17 of Protection of Child from Sexual OIt.ences Act. 2Ot2 againsr- the petitioners and numbere _l the case as SC.SPL.No.248/2022 and the same is pending before the Fast Trach Special Court for Rape and p()CSO Act Case, Wanaprrrthl,.

¶83

It is subnritted that at present the Victim is a Major and she got marriecl. Recen y the matter has been s.tUed between the parties. Thc Victim clearly said that she made a false complaint zrgainsL the petitioners. Since ure Victim got marriaqe and she wanted to live peace[u11,,,. Therefore, the Victim has no interest to prosecute the l,etitioners and accordingly she has no objection to allow the criminal petition artd quash the proceedings before the trial r ourt against the Petitioners herein. Since the matter has beer set ed between the parties. the further proceedings before 1he trial court is abuse of process o[ law. Hence this memo.

¶84

Jh,Uc^.

¶85

Date: 30-06 1t025 Hyderabad.

¶86

PITTITIONER No. I

¶87

M'S&"lua Ar,'r^ftPETITIONER No.2

¶88

flc,r"A$J-6^i,1^i^?ree!I"'a. COUNSEL FOR TIJE PETITIONERS

¶89

2"a RESPONDENT COUNSEL FOR THE 2n,r RESPONDENT

Arrugatti Shiva v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arrugatti Shiva v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Singanaboina Uma Rani Vs The State of Telangana

Mudavath Pravinder Vs The State of Telangana

Manu Devi Vs The State of Telangana

Baikadi Laxman Vs The State of Telangana

Bandru Shiva Kumar Vs State of Telangana

A.Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana