The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Ir/emorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in FIR No. 34 of 2025 of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad. l.A. Nos: 2 A,ND 3 OF 2025 l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Between: Mr. Korada Harish, S/o. Bangarayya, Aged 31 years, Occ. Hotel- Manager, - Peta, Chillapeta, Chittivalasa, Ryo. H.No. 8-62-90, N-amniivani Bheemunipatnam, Rayapalem, Vishakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. ...Petitioner AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor High Court for the State of Telangana, At HYderabad. lt4rs. Mu rivara Naveena, Wo. Divakar Raju, Aged 30 vears, Occ. Housewife, R/o. 901, Block No.9, My Home Krushi, Gachibowli, Hitderabad. Petition under Section 359(6) r/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court m;ry be pleased to permit the Petitioneri De-facto Complainant to compound the offence with the Respondent No.2/Acc;used by allowing the present criminrl petitron by quashing proceedings in FIR No. 34 of 2025 of Raidurgam Pol ce Station, Cyberabad. ...Respondents I.A. NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359(8) r/w 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lMemorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court ma1,be pleased to record the compromise entered into by the parties in FIR No. 34 tt 2O25 of Raidurgam Police Station. Cyberabad and quash the proceedings in FIR No. 34 of 2025 of Raidurgam Police Station. Cyberabad in the interest of ;rrstice. This Pet tion coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Syed Arif Basha, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, AdCitional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Sri V.N. R.Chaitrtnya, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 The Court madc the following: COMMON ORDER .:),' THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI l.A.Nos.2 AND 3 OF 2025 ln/And CRIMINAL PETITION No.3124 OF 2025 COMMON ORDER This Criminal Petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023') and the lnterlocutory Applications are filed by the petitioner/de-faclo complainant with the prayer to permit them to enter into compromise and by recording the settlement to quash the proceedings against the respondent No.2/accused No.'1 in Crime No.34 of 2025 rcf Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate.

2. The respondent No.2 is the sole accused in the Crime registered for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 324(4) read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short'BNS, 2023')

3. Heard t\lr.Syed Arif Basha, learned counsel for the petitioner/ de-facto complainant, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1 -State and Ms.V.N.R.Chaitanya, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/accused.

4. This Court yrde orcjer dated 04.03.2025 referred the parties to tfre \ High Court Legal Services Committee for identification and to verify the voluntariness in arriving the settlement. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has submitted repo( dated 12.03.2025 stating that 2 ,rx \ 71(./ .. L-'1.Nor2 ttnL ) of 2025 irfanl (i.l'.N0.) /)t of 202i *\:. the parties were identified by their respective counsel and also on verification ,)f Aadhar Cards/ldentity Cards and the enquiries revealed that the p,rrties have willfully and without coercion entered into settlemenUc lm promise 5 I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the materials on record

6. Havinly considered that the criminal petition is itself filed by the de-facto corlplainant, the nature of charged offences and Etting #*e *G.".d the amicable settlement between the parties and to restore peace betw€en the parties, in the light of the dictums in Gran Singh v. State of Pw[ab and anotherl and Anil Mishra y. Sfafe of U.P.2; State of Madhya l,radesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others3, this Court is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of the settlemerrt by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.l52B ol BNSS,2023, would be in the interest of justice.

7. Accordingly, l.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2025 are allowed. Consequently, all the proceodings in Crime No.34 of 2025 of Raidurgam Police Station, | 2012 (1O) SCO 303 2 202+ Ittsc t8g 3 2019 (s) scc 688 I i F@7 ') J Nr('rr L.'1.N0:-2 axd ) oJ 2025 in I and (;rl.P.NoJl21 01 2025 are herebY quashed against the Cyberabad Commissionerate' respondent No 2/accused' o ln the above terms, the Criminal Petition is disposed of Pending miscellaneous applications' if anY, shall stand closed SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL EPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, ddy district at Rajendranagar

1. The Xlll Judicial Magistrate of First Class' Ranga z. rnlsiation"House officer, Raidurgam police S-tation, cyberabad 3. Two CCs to the puOtic piosecutot]Higf' Court for the State of Telangana at +. Oi,L-CC to Sri Sved Arif Basha, Advocate IOP-UC-]- 5 o;; cc to sri v.N.R.cnaitanya, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies Hyderabad (OUT) ABK/gh Along with a copy of Joint Memo of Compromise I l I I I I I I i I I l I i ! I HIGH COURT DATED: 1710312025 COMMON ORD=R l.A. Nos.2 AND 3 OF 2025 ln/and CRLP.No.3124 of 2025 .'. C ) I 1 19 SEP 20tr \?\\r \_ L t-. DISPOSTNG OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION AND ALLOWING l.A Nos. 2 AND 3 OF 2025 ?/z I _,4.:21i.r4-r_2. , *r -_t=-z ,, I w IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD LA. No. ol 2025 Crl'P' No' of 2O25 BeNveen: Mr. Korada Harish, S/o. BangaraYYa, Aqed 31 Years, Occ: Hotel l4anager, n7o. g.ruo. 8-62-90, Nammivani Peta, Chillapeta, Chittivalasa, Bheemunipatnam, Riyapalem, Vishakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh' 1 2 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor High Court for the State of Telangana, At Hyderabad. Mrs. Munivara Naveena, W/o. Divakar Raju, Aged 30 years, Occ: Housewife, Rio. #901, Block No'9, MY Home Krushi, Gachibowli, HYderabad. .. Petitioner/De-facto Complainant .. Respondent/ComPlainant . Respondent/Accused JOINT MEMO ItissubmittedthatthePetitioner/De-factoComplainantalongwiththeRespondent No.2/AccusedisfilingthepresentJointMemotocompoundtheoffencesaSagainstthe RespondentNo,2hereinintheaboveCriminalPetitionaSthematter/disputebetween them is settled out of court amicably, at the intervention of their well-wishers' In view of Said settlement, the Petitioner/De.facto Complainant does not want to proceed With the case against the accused any more' Hence it is PraYed that this Hon'ble Court may be Pleased to Permit the Petitioner/De.factoComplainanttocompoundandcompromisetheoffenceswiththe RespondentNo.2byallowingtheCriminalPetitionbyquashingFlRNo.34of2025of . ''e{.B- Raidurgam Police S:ation, Cyberabad and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. \ Place: Hyderabad Date:fg-;02.2025 r$-

6.\\ Petitioner/De-facto Cornplainant Counsel for Petitioner/De-facto Complainant Respondent No.2/A:cused Counsel for Respon Jent No.2/Accused