The High Court · 2025

Petrtion under Section 359(6) rlw 528 of BNSS prayrng that in the crrcumstances stated in ther lt4emorandum of Grounds of Crrminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petltioner for compromise in C C. No 36 of 2021, arising from Fltl No 94 of 2017 on the file of XIX Additronat Chief ltrletropolrtan lvlagistrate IVSiJ Court Complex, Secunderabad. in terms of the accompaniecl compromise memo l.A. NO: 4 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359(2) rlw 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in th€, Joint Memo of Compromise along with, the High Court may be pleased to compound the offences for quashing the charge sheet n C.C. No. 36 of 2021, arising fronr FIR No. 94 of 2017 on the file of XIX Additional Chief lvletropolitarr [\rlagistrate I\/SJ Court Complex, Secunderabad, in 'erms of the accompanied cc,mpromrse memo. This Petition coming cn for hearing, upon perusing the [Vlemorandum.of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. A. Anasuya, Advocate for the Petitioners, Sri D. Arun Kumar, Additional Public l)rosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri K Venumadhav, Advocate for the Respondenl No 2. The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA I.A.Nos.3 &4of 2025 1n and CRIMINAL PETITION No.2286 of 2025 DATE:22.L2.2025 Between: Kancharla Babu Rao Pe titioncr/ Respondent No.2 AND 1 . The State ol Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court At Hyderabad.

2. K.Anjaney'ulu and other Respondent/ ResPondent Respondent/ Accused Nos.5 & 6 COMMON ORDER: It is submitted b1' learned counscl appearing lor the peLitioner as well as the respondent/ Accu scd Nos.S & 6, that during pendency of the present Criminal PetiLion, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, I.A.Nos.3 & 4 ot 2025 have been hled to record the compromise between them and to compound the offences'

2. Vide order dated 04. 12.2025, this Court directed the parties along with their respective counsel to appea-r before the Secreta-.ry, High Court I \ 2 Lcgrrl Scnices Con rrrittec, High Court for the State ol Telangara, Hvderabad, lor identifir:ation and to submit a rcport.

3. Pursllixrt to l.rt: above said direction issued b1,. this Court, the partLr-'s l1R1'g rrl)pear-. (l ancl the Secreran', High Court Legal Scn.ices Cornmittc--c, Iias ideritified tlte parties :urd sirbmittcd a report. dated

17.l,2.2O)5 arncl the srrrne is placed on rccorcl.

1. [n r.ie,,r of thc above, I.A.Nos.3 & 4 of 2025 are allog,eci_ C'onscqut:n tlJ', this (lrirnintrl Petition is allorvcd and the proceedings in C.C.No.3(; ol 2021 on thc filc o[ lear-ncd XIX fdditional Chicf Mc[ropolitan Magtstlate, I\.1SJ Court Complex, Secunclcrabad in corrnection rvilh Crinc No.9.1 ol 20ll of Chilkalguda policc Sration, againsr the petitLoner is hercby quashcd sublec.t to tlte petitioncr-paying an arnount oi lls.5,0()O/ (Rupees Fivc 'l'hous:ind Only) to the Director, Sainik Welfzrc, Hyderrrbad (Savings A/c. No.5 2 188926279. State Bank of India. Shanlinagar Eirar-rch (2OO7O\, It;SC Code: SBINO02OO7O. MICR No.5OOOO.+057) and lis.5,OO0/ (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to thc Teltmgerla High Court Advocates Association, Hl.derabird, s.ithin :,r penod of ftro (02) r,r'eeks from today and hlc proof of thc same bcfore the Registn,. I\'liscellareous al)plications, if an-y pending, shall stard closcd. Sd/- A. SREENIVASA REDDY A SISTANT REGISTRAR \ SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To,

1. The XIX Additional Chief l\rletropolitan lVlagistrate, City Civil Courts, C rief [t4etropolitan [,4agistrate, N/SJ Court Complex, Secu nderabad 2. The )( Additional Secunderabad .-tfl# Hyderabad [OUT] 3- The Station House Officer, Chilkalguda Police Station' Hyderabad 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at 5. One CC to Smt. A Anasuya, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri K. Venumadhav Advocate IOPUC] 7. Two CD CoPies I / (Along with a coPY of Joint tvlemo) ry- VIVI)L NOTE: Total Amount of Rs. 10,0001 ( Rupees Ten thousand only ) has been paid by Smt.A.Anasuya,CounselforthePetitronersasdirectedbytheHon,bleCourtvide orderdated22.12-2025asRs,5,0001(RupeesFrvethousandonly)totheDirector, Sainik Welfate, Hyderabad, and Rs. 5,0001 (Rupees Five thousand only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Assocration, Hyderabad and filed Memo as proof of compliance USR No. 4524 of 2026 dated 19-01-2026. HIGH COURT DATED: 2211212025 COMMON ORDER l.A. NO: 3 AND 4OF 2025 IN/AND CRLP.No.2286 of 2025 1r{E s I4 tI t o o 9,. * 2 3 llAq 2026 O * PATC ALLOWING THE CR!MINAL PETITION 1U Tb T ar" IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OFTELANGANA AT:: HYDERABAD Crl.P. No. 2286 of 2025 IN C.C. No. 36 of 2027, arising from FIIi No. 94 of 2O17, On the file of Hon'ble XIX Additional Chief Mekopolitan Magistrate MS] Court Complex, Secunderabad. Between:- 1). K. Anjaneyulu S/o. Buchaiah, Age: 40 Years. Occ: Employee, R/o. H. No.358/4, Hyderguda, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. 2). N. Subramanya Sastry S/o. N. Venkateswarlu, Age: 50 Years, Occ: Private Service, R/o. H. No.11-20-20/314, HUDA Complex, Saroor Nagar, Hyderabad. ...Petirioners/Accused No's. 5 and 6 AND 1). The State of Telangana, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. ...Respondent. 2). Kancharla Babu Rao S/o. Late. Gopinath (Gopaiah), Age:77 YeNr Occ: Retired Divisional Engineer (NPDG"/Warangal), R/o. Flat No. 502 Heavenly Homes, Alkapuri, Road No. 1, SRKPuram, Hyderabad. | 4 t\hnq!Ll,, L ,J, <.s^A&_- 3 ...Respondent/De-facto Com plainant. 2 I'I{E OINT ( OMPR OMISE MEMO FILED BY AND THE ITION RESPOND ERS No.2. 1) lr is sub,rittecl rhat, trris quash petition is filed bv trre petiti.rers praying this Horr'trle Cr,s16 1,, quash the charge sheet ilr C.C. No. 36 of 2021, arisirrg from FIR No. 94 of 2017, on the file of Hon,blc XIX Additional Chioi Metropolitan Magistrate MSI Court Complex, Secunderahad, in rvhich their names are shown as Accusecl No,s. 5 .nd 6 2). lt is srrtrnrittetl that, basing on a complaint filcd bi,the respondent No' 2 hereir.r the police ch,kalguda, registered a F.I.R. No. 91 r'tf 2077, f'rr thc off'enccs punisirable under Sections 420, 467, 46g,47L, 174, 1.09 r/w,. 34 I.p.C, after completion of the investigation, the investigation offir cr fileri the charge sheet in which the petitioners narnes are shon n as Accused No,s. 5 and 6. 3) It is s,b,ritte, that, the alregations of the responde.t No. 2 in his complai.l are trrat, impersonating him with a fake voter identity card forgrng his signature a sarr: deed document No. 2247 of z016,dated 01- 06-2076, in r.1;ardirrg with rhe prot of land of the respondent No. 2, \\ DYUlriLf cl" > f\r.<. *ilL 3 3 bearing ptot No. 67 in part of Sy. No. 15 (old No. 30/2), admeasuring 333.33 sq. Yds or 27g.6g sq. Mtrs sihrated at paclmarao Nagar, Zamistanpur, Secunderabad, adding thc Municipal No. 6_1_ 132/67' is executed in favour of one B. srinivas Raju a.d another named J. DhaLnalaxmi, whose narnes are shown as Accused No. 3 and 2, and others whose n€unes are shown as Accused No,s. l, 4 and T,including these petitionert as such requested to take action. 4). It is subrnitted that, therea-fter, the respondent No. 2 herein had executed a registered cancenation deed document No. g2g of 2077, d,ated. 08-03-2017, cancelling the said registered sale deed document No. 2247 of 2016, dated 01-06-2016. 5)' It is submitted tha! the A'ccused No. 2 had f,ed a writ petition in w'P' No. 18285 o12077, before this Hon'ble Court challenging the said registered cancellation deed document No. g2g of 2012 dated 0g_03_ 2O77.The said writ petition was dismissed through orders dated 31_07_ 2025 6). It is subrnitted that, the petitioners herein had filed this quash petition with a prayer to quash the I 15 N:.Ja.y\edeb . f,*","1r.,g, againsr them. ?- u'< sa:& 3 { I I i I ! I t I I i L i 4 7). It is submittecl that, now at the intervention of elderS an r"u'ishers ihe par-tics got rcsolvecl the differences which arose bctw them ir.r tcnns oi tht saicl settlcnrc.nt the pelitioners herein ancl the Accnsc'cl \o. 2 to J assrrred to the respondent No. 2 that, they shall not interferc and shall not rlailn aly right over the said sub;'ect matter plot of land arrd in rcg;rrcli.11 *,ith the said cancellation deed document No. 828 of 2()i7, datecl 08-0j-2012 and arso assured the respondent No. 2 that, thc-r' will n.t intc'lcre ir-r a.y manner in peaceful possession tr,d enjoyme.t .f thc saicl plot of iancl with the respondent No. 2 ancl also shown th.ir readi*r'ss t() cooperate in all aspects before all authoritics, for getting permissi.n o' to cleal with in any manner by the respo.c{e-ni No. 2 in rt'1;.rding n,ith rris plot of land, for which the respondent No. 2 hacl accr'Pted tr-r r:oopr'r^te for getting the quash of the charge sheet/c.irninal pr1rs1.i1{1;1gs agair-rst the petitioners and the Accused No's. 2 kr 4, accordir.rgly this joint compromise memo is entered into. 8). Th.rt, thc. prs5i1i611".s assures that they shall not claim any right or interest ..d shail not interfere in any manner in regarding with the above stirtcrl Plor No. 67 irr part of Sy. No. 15 (old No. 30/2), t t\ .lArydne/eLL. L A-r'(. <-Nt- 3 5 I I admeasuring 333.33 Sq. y.ds . or .22g.69 Sq. Mtrs siluated at Padmarao Nagar, Zamistanpur, Secunderabad, while enioying the same by the respondent No. 2. 9). That, the respondent No. 2 can deal with his above stated plot as per his will and wish and the petitioners assures the respondent No. 2 ': that, they shall cooperate in all aspects with the respondent No. 2 in . enjoying or dealing with in any marmer in regarding with the said plot before all authorities or wherever respondent No. 2 requests- 10). That, the Accused No. 3 assures tha! he shall withdraw the writ appeal filed by him i.e., in W.A. No. 11gg of 2025, if so arlvices by filing appropriate a{fi davit/petition. 11). That, the respondent No. 2 can get back/get return the registered sale deed document No. D4z of 20L6, dated.01-06-2016, which is filed along with charge sheet before the Hon'ble xX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magishate, at secunderabad, for which the petitioners a.d other Accused No's. 2 to 4, haveno obpction and are ready to cooperate for the same. t t\ Ary4ae16ln t AJ.J: lz-LJp- J .{ i I I I 6 12).That, the Accused No's. 2 and 3 had filed a suit in O.S. N o of 2016,.' the file of l-{on'ble I J,nior Civil }udge, City Civil Court a secu.derab;rcl, against one K. Rajinikanth showing his address as Bachupaltl' by mcntionirrg such person's name in the said suit as son of the respo^dent No. 2 anrl 2 others for perpetual injunctiory the said suit r.vas decreecl in favour of the plaintif{s, through this settlement the Accused No's. 2 a^cl 3 l'ho arc the plaintiff No's. 2 and 3 in the said suit assures thc rcspondent No. 2 that, they do not claim any such right and they shall not i.tcrfert' in ar-ry lnaruler in regarcling with peaceful possession and enjoym,lnt of the subject matter plot of land while enjoving by the rcspondcnt No. 2 as the respondent No. 2 is in peaceful possession and enjovment of the same. 13). That, the resp.ndent No. 2 has no objection for quashing of this crimilal proceedings by allowirrg this quash petition. 14). That, the responde't No. 2 sharl file an aJfidavit to the effect that, he has no objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings by allowing this criminal petition. I t4 hpaneld1s 1- to'(S4ilL 3 I I 7 15). For all the reasons stated above, this Hon'ble Court may be pleascd to quash the charge sheet in C.C. No. 36 of ZO2l, arising from FIR No. 94 of 2017, on the file of Honble XIX Additional Chicf Metropolitan Magistrate MSJ Court Complex, Secunderabad, as agairrst the pefitioners/Accused No's. 5 and 6, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justicc Date: 31-10-2025. Place: Hyderabad. t1.Aq-wn.ZeLo Petitioner No. 1 u'(Sa& Petitioner No. 2. Counsel for the Petitioners. a Respondent No. 2. Counsel for the Respondent No. 2. I =l