The High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana, Rep.by the Public Prosecutor, at High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. ...AppellanUAccused ...Respondents Appeal under Section 415 of BNSS,2023 praying that the High Court may be pleased to ailow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the judgment passed against appellants in S.C. No.40 ol 2019 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-Vl Additional Sessions Judge, Secunderabad daled 30 I 1 21 2024. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 BETWEEN: Valaboju Manohar Chary, S/o.Late Santhaiah Chary, Age 56 years, Occ Goldsmith (Ganesh Jewellers, Ameerpet) Ri./o.H.No.8-4-370/'102, Raj Nagar, Borabanda, Hyderabad N/o.Ankudadu (V), Dhone (M), Kumool District. ...Petitioner/Appellant in CRLA and lA.Nos.2 &3 ol 2025 AND 1 The State of Telanoana Rep.by the public prosecutor, at High Court Buildings, Hydera b-ad. ...RespondenuRespondent in cRLA and Respondent No.1 in rA.Nos. 2 &3 of 2O2i

2. Bitla Sandeeo S/o. Late Bifla Mallesh, Age 23 years, Occ: pvt. Employee, Rl/o. H, No.B-4-3so/3/3, pre;;;s;;;E;AA;;,?yoeranao .

3. Smt. Valaboiu Madhavi, Wio.Sandeep, Age 22 years, Ot:c: Housewife. R/o. H. No. 8-4-380/3/3, premnaga r, errhgiada, ft il;A;il ". Defacto comprainants/party No.2 and 3 in cRLA and IA.Nos.2 &3 of 2025 Petition under Section 523 R/w 359 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, in. riign corrt pleased to permit him to compound tire offence under Section ioz, tpc and Sec 3(2) (V) of SC, ST (pOA), Act, 1989 in SC.No.40 of 20.t9 on tne fife ot the Special Judge for Triar of offences under scs & srs (poAf n.t-"rrn'-vr Additional Sessions Judge, Secunderabad dated 30112t2O24. -be IANO:3O F 2025 Petition under Section 52g R/w 359 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, ir,. ri,gr, corrt may be preased to record compromise the crime in SC.No.40 0r )ors oi in"-fir" of the Special Judge for Triar of offences under scs srs (poA) Act rses Aci-cum- Vl Additional Sessions Judge Secunderabad dateJ SOnZtZOZq Counsel for the Appeltant in CRLA.no .25 ot 2O2S and is also Appearing for Respondents Nos.2 & 3 in l.A.Nos.2 & 3 in t.A.NO.2 &3 of 2O2S SRI K ANAND KUMAR Counsel forthe Resiondent State : pUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER r_ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2O25 IN/AND CRTMINAL APPEAL No.25 of 2o25 COMMON oRDER: This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant/accused aggrieved by the judgment passed in Special Sessions case No.4O of 20 19 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of Offences under S.Cs. & S.Ts. (pOA) Act-cum-Vl Additional Sessions Judge, secunderabad, whereunder he was convicted for the offences under Section 307 of the Indian pena,l Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IpC) and Section 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, l9g9 (for short, 'SCs & STs (pOA) Act,) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one months for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC and also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten (1O) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,OOO/_, in default of payment of Iine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 3(2)(V) of the SCs & STs (pOA) Act. 2

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted th,e de facto compiainant/ PW.1 and PW.2 are none other than the son-in-lalr' and daughter of the appellant. During the pendency of the present Criminal Appeal, at the instance of the well u'ishers, relatives and elders, the parties have settled t-he dispute and entered compromise and filed joint memo daLed 27 'O1'2O25' Accordingly, the appellant and PWs'1 and 2 filed I'A'Nos'2 and 3 of 2025 to permit them to compound the offenr:t:s and to record the compromrse elttered between them.

4. This Court uide order, dated 09.04.2025, directed the parties i.e., the appellant and PWs'1 and 2 to a[)pear before the High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderaba-d, on or before

17.O4.2025. Ir-r compliance of the said order, the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee has submitted report dated t7.o4.2025.

5. In the report, dated 17.04.2025, it is stated that the appellant and PWs. 1 and 2 and learned counsel fur the appeliant appeared and the parties have filed joint memo lt is further stated that the parties have frled copies of their Aadhar Cards/PAN card and they are identified by their counsel' It is I I l also mentioned that the parties specifically stated that they have willfully and without arry coercion entered into compromise. 6. The parties herein have Iiled joint memo of compromise along with I.A.No.3 of 2025. The said joint memo of compromise and the report of the Secretar5r, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, are placed on record. 7. Today, the appellant and the de facto complainant/pW.l and PW.2 appeared physically before this court and pws. i and 2 I stated that they are not having any objection to set aside the judgment passed by the triat Court against the appellant. 8. I In view of the said report and also in view of the compromise entered between the appellant and pWs. 1 and 2 as well as the submissions made by pWs. I and 2,I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 20 )5 are allowed. Consequently, the judgment dated 30.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge for Trial of Oflences under S.Cs. & S.Ts. (pOA) Act-cum_Vl Additional Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, in Special Sessions Case No.40 of 2Ol9 is set aside. However, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant has to pay costs on the ground that the parties have consumed the valuabre time of the triar court more than five years and prosecuted the proceedings. I 4 I 9 . Accordingl_v, the Criminal Appeal is zLilowed subject to payment of costs of Rs. 1O,OO0/ - (Rupees ten thousand only) by the appellant to the High Court Legal Services Committee, on or before 02.05.2025. Miscellancous applications, pending if eury, shall stand closed SDI C.V. MALiLIKARJUNA VARMA JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// f- .t SECTION OFFICER 1 To, )

1. The Special Judge for Trial of offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-Vl Additional Sessions Judge, Secunderabad(with records, if any) 2. The Secretary, High court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Cherlapalli(By speed post) 4. One CC to SRI K ANAND KUMAR, Advocate [OPUCI 5. 'Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT)

6. Two CD Copies ADK Along with a copy of Joint Memo of Compromise Note: Total Amount of Rs. 10,000i- ( Rupees Ten thousand only ) has been paid by SRI K ANAND KUIUAR, Counsel for the Petitioner as directed by the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 22-04-2025 to the High Court Legal Services Commiftee and filed Memo as proof of compliance vide USR No.46392 ol 2025 dated 25-04- 2025. I \ # ,r7- ft. tf, HIGH COURT DATED:2210412025 COMMON ORDER l.A.Nos.2 and 3 o12025 ln/and CRLA.No.25 of 2025 I lrc. \: aoB ::\- t r-) 2 5 APR itffi a' ALLOWING THE CRLA AND lA.NOs.2 & 3 OF 2025 V * 1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT JUDICATUTE FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD I.A.No Crl.A.No. 25 of 2O25 ot 2025 Between: Valaboj u Manohar CharY S / o. Late Santhaiah Chary, Age 56 years, Occ: Goldsmith (Ganesh Jewellers, Ameerpet) R/o.H.No.8-4- 37 O / lO2' Raj Nagar, Borabanda, HYderabad N/o.Ankudadu (V), Dhon (M), Kurnool District. Petitioner/ APPellant 1 2 ?) And The State of Telangana, Rep.by the Public Prosecutor, At High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. Bitla Sandeep S/o.Late Bitla Mallesh, Age 23 years, Occ: Pvt. EmPloYee, R/ o. H,No.8-4- 38O / 3 / 3' Premnagai, Erragadda, HYdeiabad Respondent/ Respondent Smt.Valaboju Madhavi, W/ o. Sandeep, Age 22 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o.H.No.8-4-38O I 3 I 3, Premnagar, t.og"aa., Hyderabad Defacto complainants/ PartY No.2 ald 3 JOINT MEMO FILED BY THE APETITION ER/ APPELLANT AND DEFACTO COMPLAIN ANTS It is submitted that the Petitioner / Appellant and we being the party No.2 and 3 / defacto complainants compromised the matter at the intervention of the elders, well-wishers and relatives arrived at compromise keeping in view of the future since the petitioner / appellant and the party No.3 of us are being father and daughter and \ 2 Party No.2 herein is thc son executed Menroran<Jum or. involved under rhe ,'r, o . , coercion and u e beirg ,n.t 'n-"ttn' ofpetitioner / appellant herein and tl:ottstanding to compromise the issue t"'t free will and copsent 'r/ithout any r,.;,,.,r-u' a#:lrffi :1 ;r:H :; ;ffi:ff "n r.,r, " ::H-r, r Thcrefore. r I is pra_r,etl that the lJon,ble Court may be pleased to close Crl.A. No.25 o1.2 o,, the file of this Hon'ble clourt by setting asicre the se ntence ,,n'-t against the Appellant in S(1.No.40 of 201g on the file o, ,n.t'^tt'to under SCs & Srs ,r"jT:'::,';T: ffi;l":rJ::::: Judge, Secunde ra b:r c.l d:rtcd 30 I2_2024. ! A.Sr,-8 ES""okq Hence this Joiot Merno. Petitione r Party Nc.2 V'ftaJ\arl? Party No.3 Llw Counsel for the petitioner/Appe l I I i I i I i i