Shaik Ibrahim Mohammed Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shaik Ibrahim Mohammed Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal Petition No. 17837 of 2025 and I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 allowed: offences compounded, compromise recorded, and proceedings in S.C.No.840 of 2024 quashed against petitioners/accused Nos. 2 to 4, subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad and Rs.5,000/- to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad on or before 20.02.2026; miscellaneous applications, pending if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025, seeking permission to compound the offences and to record the compromise entered into between petitioners/accused Nos. 2 to 4 and respondent Nos. 2 and 3, should be allowed. +1 more

Court's answer

I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 (permission to compound the offences and record the compromise) are allowed.

Ratio / Principle

The proceedings in S.C.No.840 of 2024 on the file of the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad at Nampally, are quashed against the petitioners/accused Nos. 2 to 4.

Key takeaways

The allowance of the I.As and the quashing rest on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the earlier order of this Court in Crl.P.No.2928 of 2024 dated 11.06.2024, the High Court Legal Services Committee report, the compromise between the parties and the submissions made.ratio¶59
The Criminal Petition is allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad and Rs.5,000/- to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, by the petitioners on or before 20.02.2026.ratio¶62

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (J. Sreenivas Rao, J.), 06.02.2026: Criminal Petition No. 17837 of 2025 with I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 under Sections 528, 359(6) and 359(2) BNSS. Accused Nos. 2 to 4 in SC No. 840 of 2024 (IV Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad at Nampally) sought quashing after settling disputes with complainant-respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and filing a Joint Memo. Co-accused Nos. 5 and 6 had already obtained compounding, recording of compromise and quashing of the very same proceedings in Crl.P.No.2928 of 2024 by order dated 11.06.2024. Acting on the Court's direction of 30.12.2025, the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee reported (19.01.2026) that the parties were identified through Aadhar Cards and had compromised willfully and without coercion. The Court allowed I.A.Nos.3 and 4, compounded the offences, recorded the compromise and quashed the proceedings against the petitioners, subject to costs of Rs.20,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee and Rs.5,000/- to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association payable by 20.02.2026; miscellaneous applications closed. Compliance memo records payment of Rs.25,000/- (USR No. 22470 of 2026 dated 23.02.2026).

[³³⁰³ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS^RAO

l.A. Nos. 3 and 4 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL PETITIO NO: 17837 OF 2025

Between:

Shaik lbrahim Mohammed, S/o Shaik ft/ohammed Bin^{Yousuf, Agedabout 34} yrs, Occ. Business, R/o H.n. 17-3-858/4, Zafar Road, Yakutpura,^Hyderabad.

Shaik Suleman Bin tMohammad, S/o Shaik^{Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about} 24 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o H.no. 17-3-858/4,^{Zafar Road, Yakutpura,} Hyderabad.

Shaik Salman Bin Mohammad, S/o Shaik^{Mohammed Bin Yousuf,Aged about} 32 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o 17-3-B5B/A,Zafar Road,^{Yakutpura, Hyderabad.}

Petitioners/A2 to 44

AND

The State of Telangana, through its^{public prosecutor having office At High court} Hyderabad.

trlustafa Bin Salam, S/o Salam Bin^{Yousuf, Aged about22 yrs, Occ. Business,} R/o Aman Nagar A, Chaminar, Hyderabad.

...Complainant

Sheik tr/ustafa Bin Ali, S/o Salam Bin^{Yousuf, Agedabout 22 yrs, Occ. Business,} R/o Aman Nagar A, Chaminar, Hyderabad.

...Com plainanUlnj uredlRespondents

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^praying that^{in the circumstances statedin the} lt/lemorandum of Grounds of Crirninal Petition, the^{High Court may be pleasedto call for}

the entire records, relating to SC No. 840 of 2024, on the file of lV Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge. tlyderabad at Nampally, and quash the same in the interest ofjustice.

l.A. NO: 2OF 201.5

Petition under Section li28 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceerdings in SC No 840 ol 2024, on the file of lV Addl lt/etropolitan Sessions Judge, lyderabad at Nampally, pending quash petition.

l.A. NO: 3 OF 20:25

Between:

Alustafa Bin Salam, S/o Salam Bin Yousuf, Aged about 22 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o Aman Nagar A, Chaminar, Hyderabad.

Sheik lvlustafa Bin Ali, S/o Salam Bin Yousuf, Aged about 22 yrs. Occ. Business, R/o Aman Nagar A. Chaminar, Hyderabad

.Petitioner/ 2n & 3'd Respondent

AND

1 The State of Telangana, through its public prosecutor having office At High court Hyderabad. ... Respondent

Shaik lbrahim Mohammed, S/o Shaik Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about 34 yrs. Occ. []usiness, R/o H.n. 17-3-858/A, Zafar Road, Yakutpura, Hyderabad.

Shaik Suk:man Bin Mohammad, S/o Shaik Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about 24 yrs. 3cc. Business. R/o H.no. 17-3-858/A, Zafar Road, Yakutpura, Hyderabad.

Shaik Salrnan Bin Mohammad, S/o Shaik Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about 32 yrs, Occ. Business, Rio 17-3-B5B/A, Zafar Road, Yakutpura, Hyderabad.

...Respondnets/Letitioners

Petition under Section 359 (6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandurn of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Permit the Petitirners/ Respondents No. 2 and 3 to compound the offences with the respondents/petitioners/Accused by allowing the Criminal Petition filed by the petitioners

against SC.No. 840 of²⁰²⁴ on^{the file of lV Addl.tt/etropolitanSessions Judge,} Hyderabad at Nampally.

l.A. NO: 4 OF 2025

Petition under Section 359(2) of^{BNSS praying that in the circumstances statedin} the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition, the High Courtmay be pleasedto} record compromise with between the^{Petitioners/RespondentsNo.2and 3/ defacto} complainant and the^{Petitioners/Accusedand the proceedings against the} Petitioners/Accused may be^{quashedin SC.No.840 of 2024 on the file of lV Addl.} lVletropolitan Sessions Judge,^{Hyderabad at Nampally,in the interest of justice.}

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{upon perusingthe Memorandum of Grounds of} Criminal Petition and upon^{hearingthe arguments of Mr. Mohammed Adnan, Advocate} for the Petitioners and the^lVlr. Shaik^{AbdulKhader, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.} 2 & 3, Public Prosecutor on behalf^{of the RespondentNo.1.}

The Court made the following:^ORDER

IN THID HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THT) HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025

IN/AND

CRIMINAL PETITION No. L7837 of 2o25

Date: 06.02.2026

Between:

Shaik Ibrahirn Mohammed and two others.

....Petitioners/Accuscd Nos. 2 to 4

AND

The State cf^'lelangzrna, through its Public Prosecutor, and another.

Responderrt s

COMMON'ORDER:

This Crimin:r1 Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 seel<ing to quash the proceedings in s.c.No.840 of 2024 on the file of the IV Additional Metropolitan sessions Judge, Hyderabad at Nampally.

Heard Mr.Mohammed Adnan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.shaik Abdul Khader, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for responden: Nos.2 and 3 submitted that at the instance of the well wishers, rerlatives and elders, petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3

2

have settled the disputes pending between them and entered^into compromise and filed Joint Memo. Accordingly, the parties have^filed I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 seeking permission to compound the offence^s ernd to record the compromise entered bet'uveen them.

Both the learned counsel further submitted that in respect^ol the very same proceedings, accused Nos.S and 6 have approached^this Court and liled Crl.P.No.2928 of 2024 for quashing of the^{very same} proceedings and this Court compounded the offences, recorded^the cornpromise and quashed the proceedings argarinst them^on 11.06.2024. Hence, the petitioners and respondenl Nos.2 and 3^have filcd this Criminal petition.

This Court uide order, dated 30.12.2025, directed the^parties i.e., the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3, to appear before^the High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, on or^before 19.01.2026 for their identification. In compliance of the^{said order,} the Secret?ry, High Court Legal Services Committee, has submitted report, dated 19.0i .2026, stating that the petitioners, and^respondent Nos.2 and 3 were duly identified with copies of their Aadhar Cards.^It is further stated that the parties have willfully and without^any coercion entered into compromise.

Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the orders passed by this^{Court in}

3

cr1.P.No.2928 of 2024 dated 11.06.2024, the report submitted by the High court Legal Services committee, the compromise entered between the pctiticlners and respondent Nos.2 ancl 3, as well as the submissions madc by the respective parties, I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2O2s are allou,e<l. Conse:quently, the proceedings in S.C.No.84O of 2024,on the file of the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions .Iudge, Hyderabad at Nampal.y, are hereby quashed against the petitioners.

Acccrdingly, the criminal Petition is allowed, subject to paymenr o[ costs ol Rs.20,oo0/- (Rupees tr.nenty thousand only) to the High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad and Rs.5,O00/- (Rupees five thousand only) ro tl-re Telangana High court Advocates Associatio.r, Hyderabad, b1' the petitioners, on or before 20.02.2026.

Misc:ellaneoLls applications, pending if any, shall stand closed

sD/- M.OSUem Alt BAIG ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Vlll Additional Chief [/letropolitan [t/lagistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.^(with records i1'any)

The Station House Officer,, Rein Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad

One CC io Mr. lVlohammed Adnan, Advocate [OPUC]

One CC to Mr. Shaik Abdul Khader, Advocate [OPUC]

5 Two CCr; to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderab;rd tOUI

tL.J)

l,

Two CD CoPies

/ilr'(F:n"tosed a copy of Joint Memo)

Note : Total Amount of^{Rs. 25,000/-has been paid by sri lMohammed} Adnan, Counsel for the^{Petitioner as directedby the Hon'bleCourt vide} order dated 06 02.2026^{as Rs. 20,0001 ( RupeesTwenty thousandonly )} to the^"High court Legal^{servicescommittee,Hyderabad,and Rs. 5,000/-} ( Rupees Five thousand only )^{to the Telangana High Court Advocates} Association, Hyderabad^{and filed lVlemoas proof of compliance USRNo-} 22470 of 2026 dated^23.02.2026

HIGH COURT

DATED: OGl02l2O26

COMMON ORDER

I.A. N .3and4of202^E IN/AND cRr AL PETITION NO: 17837^{OF 2025}

AT EO F
o
u
\ tl$ r$e
+ *ETC.

ALLOWING CIlIMINAL^PETITION AND I.A. NOS 3 AND⁴ OF²⁰²⁵

0r,1
rL
b

,,":

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

CRLP. No.

of 2025

BETWEEN:

Mustafa bin Salam, S/o Salam Bin Yousuf, Aged about 22 yrs, Occ: Business, R/o Aman Nagar A, Chaminar, Hyderabad.

Sheik Mustafa Bin Ali, S/o Salam Bin Yousuf, Aged about 22 yrs, Occ: Business, R/o Aman Nagar A, Chaminar, Hyderabad.

.Petitioner/2'd & 3'd Respondent

AND

The State of Telangana, Through Its Public Prosecutor, having office at High Court, Hyderabad.

Shaik Ibrahim Mohammed, S/o Shaik Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about 34 yrs, Occ: Business, R/o H.n. 17-3-B5B/A, Zafar Road, Yakutpura, Hyderabad.

Respondent

Shaik Suleman Bin Mohammad, S/o Shaik Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about 24 yrs, Occ: Business, R/o H.no. 17-3-B5B/A, Zafar Road, Yakutpura, Hyderabad.

Shaik Salman Bin Mohammad, S/o Shaik Mohammed Bin Yousuf, Aged about 32 yrs, Occ: Business, R/o 17-3-B5B/A, Zafar Road, Yakutpura, Hyderabad.

. . . Respondents/Petitioners

'!s! '

FI

ND

May it pleas;e your Lordship

It is subrnitted that due to intervention of well wishers and elders the respondents No.2 and 3 have entered into compromise with the petitioners

It is subrnitted that the petitioners. The respondents No.2 and 3 were

under the lvrong berief that petitioners are master minds behind the

offence but it was wrong. They have done nothing and not responsible for any offencr: against us.

The parties are closely related. Hence we do not want to proceed with them in the: present case.

Hence the rnemo

(Petitioner/Respondent No. 2)

(Respondent No.2/Accused No. 1)

l{\vSI.1"'

(Petitioner/Respondent No.3)

(Respondent No.3/Accused No.2)

(Respondent No.4/Accused No.3)

Cou nse petitioner/R-2 & 3

Counsel for the^petitioners

l:.--.