The High Court · 2025

1. Butharaju Raghavendra, S/o.Venkatesham, Aged about 30 years, Occ' Government Ehployee, R/o.Chandur Village and lt/landal, Nalgonda Diskict. 2. Smt.Butharaju Yadamma, W o.B.Venkate $ham, Aged about 49 years, Occ. Agriculture Labour, R/o.Chandur Village and ltr'landal, Nalgonda District.

3. Butharaju Venkatesham, Sio.B.Maraiah, Aged about 55 Agriculture Labour, R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. -years, Occ-

4. Butharaju Dilip, S/ o. Venkatesham, Aged aboul 27 years, Occ. Student, R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District.

5. Butharaju Sandeep, S/o. Venkatesham, Aged about 28 years, Occ. Student, R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. .. Respondents/ Petitioner in both 6- The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad. .. RespondenU Respondent l.A. NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359 (6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition,the High court may be pleased to permit the parties to compound the offences in C.C.No 59212024 on the file of the specie Judicial First class ftlagistrate (Prohibition and Excise Offence- at Nalgonda in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 4 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359 (2) of BNSS praying that in the t.:ircumstances stated in the [Vlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to record the terms of compromise between the parties in C.C_No. 59212024 on the file of the Special Judicial First class lr/agistrate (p.ohibition and Excise Offences) at Nalgonda in the interest of justice Crl.Petition No. 3271 of 2025 Between: '1 . Butharaju Raghavendra, S/o.Venkatesham, Aged about 30 years, Occ. Government Employee, R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. 2. Smt.Butharaju Yadamma, W o.B.Venkate sham, Aged about 49 years, Occ. Agriculture Labour R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda [)idtrict. 3. Butharaju Venkatesham, S/o.B.lMaraiah, Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculture Labou,, R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda I)istrict. 4 Butharaju Dilip, fi/ o. Venkatesham, Aged about 27 years, ()cc. Student, R/o.Chandur Village and [\/andal, Nalgonda District. 5 Butharaju Sandeep, S/o. Venkatesham, Aged about 28 years, fcb. Student, R/o.Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos. 1 to 5 AND 1 2 The State of Telarrgana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Cour: of Telangana, At Hyderabad. Smt.Mustipally Nandu, W o.Raghavendra, D/o.Shankar, Aged airout 23 years, Occ. House Wife, R/o.Chepur Village, Gurrampode Mandal, Nalgonda District. ...RESPoNDENT/ DE- FAcTo .. Respondent COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandrrm of Grounds of criminal petition, the High c)ourt may be pleased to quash the proceedings in c.c.No.5g2t2o24 on the file ot the special Judicial First class [\4agistrate (Prohibition and Excise offences) at Nalgonda in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandrm of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay ot all further proceedings in c.c.No.sg2t2o24 on the fiie of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (prohibition and Excise l)ffences) at Nalgonda pending dispos;al of the above Crl.p in the interest of Justice. This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the lVlemorandum of Grounds of criminal Pelrtion and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Lattupally Anand, Advocate for the petitioners in crr.petition and Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 in l.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2O2S and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Addt. pubtic Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No.1 in crr,petition and Respondent No. 6 in r'A Nos' 3 and 4 0f 2025 and of Ms- p- KAL'ANA, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 in crr.petition and petitioner in r.A.Nos. 3 and 4 0f 2025. The Court made the following COMMON ORDER: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI l.A.Nos.3 AND 4 OF 2025 ln/And CRIMINAL PETITION No.3271 OF 2025 COMMON ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2021') seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C. No.592 of 2024, on the file of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (Prohibition and Excise,Offences), Nalgonda, against the petitioners.

2. The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.'1 to 5 in the Calendar Case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-4, 504 read with Section 34 of the lndian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

3. Heard lVlr.Lattupally Anand, Iearned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public l)rosecutor, representing the respondent No.'l-State and Ms.P.Kalpana, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/de-facfo complainant. 4. Pending this rretition, the parties have entered into the ccmpromise and, accordingly, respondent No.2lde-facfo complainant filed l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 with the prayer to permit them to enter into compromise and by recording the settlement to quash the proceedings ;rgainst the petitioners/accused Nos.l to 5 in C.C.No.592 o'f 2024. G .=a 2 NIR,/ I.,4.Nor) and I inf and Cr/.P.No. )271 0J2025

5. This Court vide order dated 05.03.2025 referred the petitioners to the High Court Legal Services Committee for identification of the parties and to verify the voluntariness in arriving the settlement. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, has submitted report dated 07.03.2025 stating that the parties are identified by their respective counsel and also on verification of Aadhar Cards/ldentity Cards and the enquiries reveal that the parties have willful and without coercion entered into settlemenUcompromise

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

7. Having considered the allegations, the charged offences, which are essentially matrimonial and personal in nature and taking into account the amicable settlement between the parties and to restore peace among them, in the light of the dictums in Gian Singh v. Sfate of Punjab and anotherl and Anil Mishra v. Sfafe of IJ.P.2i State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others3, this Court is of the considered view that quashment of the impugned proceedings in view of the settlement by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.1528 of BNSS, 2023, would be in the interest of justice. | 2012 (1O) SCC 303 ' 2024 INSC 189 3 2019 (5) scc 688 3 NTR,rr l. 1..ia.t.ia l in/ad Lrl t:Xo. )271 of 2025

8. Accordingly IA.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 are allowed. Cr:nsequently, alt proceedings in C.C.No.592 of 2024, pending on the file ol'the Special Judicial First Class [\/agistrate (Prohibition and Excise Offences), Nalgonda, are hereby quashed against the petitioners/acr;used Nos. l to5

9. To ln the above terms, the Criminal Petition is disposed of Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand ;losed //TRUE COPY// Sd/- A.V.S. PRASAD DFPUTY REGISTRAR I I. J SECTION OFFICER

1. The Special Judicial First Class Magistrate ( Prbhibition and Excise Offences) Nalgonda.

2. The Station House Officer , Women Police Station, Nalgonda. 3. Two CCS to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad.(OLIT)

4. One CC to SRl. LATTUPALLY ANAND, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Ms. P. KALPANA, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies (Along with a copy of Joint Memo of Co.mpromise ) ( T \ ': w{3 "; HIGH COURT DATED:111O312O25 COMMON ORDER I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2025 ln/and CRL.PETITION No.3271 of 2025 ALLOWING THE I.,,\. NOS. 3 AND 4 OF 2025 AND DISPOSING OF'I IIE CRL.PETITION flA 1 tt / ,''.s}$ I IN THE HIGH COURT OF TEL,ANGANA AT HYDERABAD Crl.P.No R+1 of 2025 BETWEEN: 1 ).Butharaju Raghavendra S/o,Venkatesham, Aged about 3O years, Occ: Government Employee, R/o.Chaldur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. 2). Smt. Butharaju Yadamma W/o.B.Venkatesham, Aged about 49 years, Occ: Agricultrrre Labour, R/o.Chandr.rr Village and Mandal, Nalgond a District. 3). Butharaju Venkatesham S/o.B.Maraiah Aged about 55 years, Occ: Agriculture Labour, R/o-Chandur Village and Mandal, It{elgonda District. 4).Butharaju Dilip S/o. Venkatesham, Aged about 27 years, Occ: Student, Ry'o-Chandur Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District. 5). Butharaju Sandeep Sr/o. Venkatesham, A,ged about 28 years, Occ: Student, R/o.Chanrllr Village a.d Mandal, Nalgonda District. AND --- Petitioners/ Accused No-l to 5 'l I,lespondent 1).The State of lelargala, Rep.by its Publ;<: prosecutor, High Court of Telargana, At Hyderabad. 2).Smt.Mustipa 15, lttra1{, Wr/o.Raghavenc r-3, D/o.Shankar, Aged about 23 lears, Occ: House Wife, R/o.Chepur Viliage, Gurrampode Mandal, Nalgonda Distri,:t. ..- Respondent/ De-facto Compiainant JOINT MEMO 1. The Petir ioncrs are the Accused No.2 to ' 5 in CC.No.592 12024 on the file of the Special Judicial First Class Ma;Jistrate (Prohibition and Excise Ofi'ences) at Nalgonda. Ilased on the Complaint made try tht: De-facto Complainant, the Women Police Station, NaJgonda registerecl FIR No.7T 12O24 and after completing the investigatir,n, filed the Charge against the'p-efitioners for lhe offenr'r U/sec.49B-A, 5O4 lpc and Sec.3.an<l 4 of Dp Act.

2. Recently rhr: matter has been settled between the parties. The De facto Complainant has decided to live .u,ith tJ.e Accused Nc.1. The De-facto Complainant agreed fhat she is ready to leacl happy marital life with the Accused l\o.1. The De-facto Cornplainant agreed that she-will not rnake arry complaint or- any petition against the Accused .n future before any court or authority. From the date of entenng into the compromise, the pe-facto Complainant will lead the happy marital life wrth the Accused No'l without causing any disturbance to conjugal life and family life and she witl not cause any quarrels or hindrance to the Accused. The De-facto Complainant further agreed that she will look after her in-laws well and decided to live with the Accused No.1 for happy marital life'

3. In view of the compromise between tlle parties' tJle De- facto Cornplainant has no interest to prosecute the Accusedarrdaccordinglyshehasnoobjectiontoallowtlre crimina]petitionandquashtheproceedingsbeforetl.r.etrial court against the Accused herein- Therefore, since tlre rnatter has been settled between the parties' the further proceedings before the trial court is abus'e of process of law and the same is liable to be quashed' Hence this memo. Date: O3-O3-2O25 Hyderabad. 9 PETITIONER No.2 lL S^rrl"e{ PETITIONER No.5 r-t r^ 2"a RESPONDENT R: PEIITIONER No.l B o3o S'lf .{o PETITIONER No-3 PETITIONERNo-4 COUNSEL FOR THE PETITTONERS COUNSEL FOR THE 2"d RESPONDENT